[heathIam]

RN Power Ohio

I am curious how you know that the hospital in question didn't treat the person with respect, that they were not communicating or that they lied about not doing the rectal exam? Were you involved and present at this incident?

[RN Power Ohio]

I was not involved in this incident.

I deduced those things based upon the news release- handcuffed? Doesn't sound very respectful. It states in the article that the hospital testified they never did the exam.

I do have a little insight regarding medical malpractice claims as I am a legal nurse consultant and review many both potential and actual claims. I know what it takes to bring a suit to court so there must be more to the story.

[Anxious Patient]

You have to remember that this trial was about a specific patient with a specific complaint. The verdict didn't address the issue of a hospital's right to force rectal exams. The patient in this lawsuit had an unfavorable personal background, such as past arrests and being on probation, he sounded like kind of a lowlife. This could have clouded the jurors' judgment.

Try to imagine the exact situation, but the patient this time was a young woman with impecable background, crying and hysterical about being forced into this rectal exam by a male doctor with other people watching, then being sedated and tied to her bed for fighting back, and then sent to jail in only her hospital gown. I have a feeling it would have been a very different outcome.

[CountyRat]

I agree with earlier posters, that the key issue was the history of head injury. If the ER staff had reason to believe that the patient's capacity to make decissions on his own behalf was impared as a result of the head injury, they were correct to assume consent and do what was necessary to protect the patient's welfare.

And, by the way, "I woke up handcuffed to the bed?" When did hospitals start using handcuffs? When did nurses and doctors start carrying them? I would not trust the newspaper accounts to be reliable sources of infomation on this kind of story. There is more to this than what they are writing (or know enough to ask about).

[CountyRat]

Originally Posted by RN Power Ohio

I was not involved in this incident.

I deduced those things based upon the news release- handcuffed? Doesn't sound very respectful. It states in the article that the hospital testified they never did the exam.

I do have a little insight regarding medical malpractice claims as I am a legal nurse consultant and review many both potential and actual claims. I know what it takes to bring a suit to court so there must be more to the story.

RN Power Ohio: Are you saying that the fact that a person files a lwsuit is evidence that they are correct in their allegations? I hope I am just misreading you. As a legal nurse consultant, you surely know that anyone can file a law suit against anyone. The fact that they file has no bearing on the question of credibility. The man had his day in court, and the jury did not buy it. Since the jury heard the evidence, and you and I have not, I think that the jury's judgement bears more credibility than ours, legal nurse consultant, or not.

What do you think?

[RN1980]

it's clearly stated in many emergency and truama literature that rectal spincter tone should be assessed to determine if any neurological/spinal damage had occured in the patient, in this guys case from a blow to the head.

[58flyer]

Originally Posted by CrunchRN

58 flyer - y'all need to slow down - are you a cat with 9 lives?

Sometimes I thought so. I may be on life #9 now so I better quit the ER visits while the quittin' is good. My last ER visit was 12 years ago, so perhaps by now I have figured out how to stay out of those places.

[mmurphy]

I agree with you

[bill baldwin]

Persaud was not a sympathetic character. He had
two violent episodes in his criminal past and his suit
was for an absurd $36 million dollars. That's what
the jury reacted to.

ANXIOUS PATIENT wrote here, recently:

"Try to imagine the exact situation, but the patient this time was a young woman with impecable background, crying and hysterical about being forced into this rectal exam by a male doctor with other people watching, then being sedated and tied to her bed for fighting back, and then sent to jail in only her hospital gown. I have a feeling it would have been a very different outcome."

I must agree. "No" means, "No". Patients have a
right to refuse without being assaulted. Forget
hospital liability. Patient rights trump possible
malpractice concerns.

If staff had taken the time to explain what they
needed to do and why... and then addressed
issues of privacy and modesty, including staff
gender concerns, none of this would have
developed. As it was, the rectal exam was
not performed but a female intern did force a
lubricated finger into the man's rectum. What
was that about? The whole episode smacks of
bullying.

Strongly suggest that hospital staff find no
mandiate for future activity of this kind in
the judgement of one jury.

[RN Power Ohio]

Originally Posted by CountyRat

RN Power Ohio: Are you saying that the fact that a person files a lwsuit is evidence that they are correct in their allegations? I hope I am just misreading you. As a legal nurse consultant, you surely know that anyone can file a law suit against anyone. The fact that they file has no bearing on the question of credibility. The man had his day in court, and the jury did not buy it. Since the jury heard the evidence, and you and I have not, I think that the jury's judgement bears more credibility than ours, legal nurse consultant, or not.

What do you think?

No I am not stating that simply because a suit was filed that is a statement of proof of fact. In fact, I am not sure I can agree based upon the facts available that this particular case has merit. Given the potential spinal injury and head wound I would agree that it would have been negligent not to do the exam (which the hospital testified that they did not).


What I am saying is that every American citizen has the right to have a dispute heard in court of law. It is unfair that so many overstate the number of frivilous suits. In fact greater than 88% of medical malpractice suits are meritorious (and of those only 20% win a verdict in their favor at a jury trial) based upon independent medical review studies.

There is much debate in the legal world as to whether a lay jury is "qualified" to decide a verdict in malpractice. I have been at trials where the doctor admitted that he was negligent and the jury still found in his favor. "Well he didn't mean to be negligent". Defense often tries to make the case so medically complex that juries cannot understand and by default side with the hospital or MD. In addition, corrupt hospitals and doctors lie under oath and alter or destroy medical records more often than most would like to imagine.

The right to a jury trial is limited in most states to only the most severely damaged, well employed or wealthy as the cost of bringing a case to trial is often more than $100,000. So while in theory any one can sue anyone this is not happening in the world of medical malpractice. Often times there is over a year of review, assessment, research and expert physician input before a suit is even considered for filing. Unless some very specific criteria are met the suit is not filed.

In summary, I am defending the gentleman's right to a hearing and pointing out some facts about malpractice in general.