Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Farmboy who wrote (477913)	3/21/2012 8:32:48 PM
From: Zakrosian	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793957

So .......... was the common consensus that she was faking, or that the doctor just never did anything wrong? She was definitely not faking. I don't remember the name for the condition, but she was paralyzed and could still feel pain, so bedsores were a real problem. The jury just concluded that the doc had done all he could - the drop in blood pressure, which would indicate internal bleeding, wasn't coupled with an increase in heart rate. The doc and anesthesiologist concluded it was just dehydration - because of an earlier problem with a previous scope, she was on a two day prep, so she hadn't eaten anything for 48 hours. But they still didn't release her until checking for a perforated colon, still not real common, but a possibility. When the test came back negative, they sent her home. Later that night, the pain got much worse, she returned to the hospital, and it was then discovered that her spleen had ruptured. All parties agreed that the procedure had caused the spleen to rupture, but that it had been performed flawlessly. Sometimes, awful things just happen, which is where we came out. The trial stretched out over 4 days, and I'm sure all parties - including the defendants - were expecting at least a 7 figure settlement. It was the plaintiff's lawyer's first lost lawsuit.