Surgery death blamed on jealous former classmate

TexasPediRN · Oct 27, 2006

I'm speechless...

Thats just so..wrong....

all4schwa · Oct 27, 2006

that's just a psychotic thing to do. 30 yrs ago? cuckoo... they live among us...

Spritenurse1210, BSN, RN · Oct 27, 2006

Are you for real? that's sick:trout: :trout: :trout:

lannisz · Oct 27, 2006

Anyone to be so sick as to get revenge for something 30 yrs ago.....she probably killed other patients too

platon20 · Oct 27, 2006

why did the surgeon get sued?

It wasnt his fault. CRNAs are independent. Anything they do is supposed to be on them, not any doctor.

zrmorgan · Nov 2, 2006

wow. yeah, the surgeon should get dismissed from this case. hard to believe the poor surgeon had to be accountable for her fentanyl administration...another reason supervision by non-anesthesia is lame. This guy will probably hire an anesthesiologist or ACT who will be completely accountable for their own practice next.

deepz · Nov 2, 2006

why did the surgeon get sued?.......

Everyone involved gets named when a suit is filed. Lawyers cast a wide net, then throw out the small fry during the course of discovery.

.

platon20 · Nov 4, 2006

Everyone involved gets named when a suit is filed. Lawyers cast a wide net, then throw out the small fry during the course of discovery.
.

That doesnt make any sense. The surgeon wasnt just named in the lawsuit, he was pursued all the way to settlement, presumably years after hte initial lawsuit. The only way thast possible is if the surgeon was directly responsible (i.e. supervising) the CRNA.

Since when do surgeons supervise CRNAs? CRNAs have independent practice, they arent supervised by anybody.

If the surgeon was initially named in the suit and then dropped before trial, i coudl see that. But thats not what happened here. The surgeon was named on the suit till the very end before a settlement was reached.

How is that possible when surgeons dont supervise CRNAs?

apaisRN, RN, CRNA · Nov 4, 2006

The information provided in the news story does not make it clear that the CRNA deliberately killed the patient. Giving a patient fentanyl in the recovery room is as routine as flushing the toilet! And I've never seen a CRNA ask a surgeon before giving narcotics.

Not saying she didn't - but - it's a far-fetched reason to kill someone and I'd want to see some pretty solid evidence.

heartICU · Nov 5, 2006

That doesnt make any sense. The surgeon wasnt just named in the lawsuit, he was pursued all the way to settlement, presumably years after hte initial lawsuit. The only way thast possible is if the surgeon was directly responsible (i.e. supervising) the CRNA.
Since when do surgeons supervise CRNAs? CRNAs have independent practice, they arent supervised by anybody.
If the surgeon was initially named in the suit and then dropped before trial, i coudl see that. But thats not what happened here. The surgeon was named on the suit till the very end before a settlement was reached.
How is that possible when surgeons dont supervise CRNAs?

Sometimes settling is less expensive than a jury trial. Unfortunately, this is what causes malpractice premiums to go up.

platon20 · Nov 5, 2006

Sometimes settling is less expensive than a jury trial. Unfortunately, this is what causes malpractice premiums to go up.

There's got to be more to it than that.

Teh state medical board reprimanded the surgeon for the CRNA giving fentanyl.

The only possible reason they would do that is if the surgeon was SUPERVISING the CRNA.

My question is, since when do surgeons SUPERVISE CRNAs? Thats the only explanation for htis case. Why the hell would the surgeon/insurance company agree to settle this case when he's totally not of fault here? He wasnt in charge of what the CRNA was doing.

The CRNA was NOT the surgeon's employee, therefore he should have no liability.