Mistrial Ruled After Arkansas Doctor Accused of Malpractice Treats Juror

December 28, 2010

  • December 28, 2010 at 1:05 am
    LP says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Generally surgery is a last resort. A prudent person would be asking questions, and asking about tests, and alternatives to make sure there are no other options. As for not being information of the risk….HELLO……it is surgery, there is always risk, and you are talking about your back and spine. Geez, grow a brain.

  • December 28, 2010 at 1:13 am
    Tx says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    After all, this is Arkansas. What competent doctor would operate without all the tests, Xrays etc? I can’t feature that happening along with advising the patient about risks of surgery and having all the forms signed off on. If he didn’t do that, he should lose his malpractice insurance and his license to practice.

  • December 28, 2010 at 1:16 am
    SecretAgentMan says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I find it hard to believe that a Dr in this day and age doesn’t have the patient sign something stating they know the risks. If that is the case, stupid Dr.

  • December 28, 2010 at 1:18 am
    LP says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Maybe it would be more prudent to have them sign something that says they “understand” the risks. Sadly the article does not mention whether she actually sustain some kind of additional injury as a result of the surgery.

  • December 28, 2010 at 1:48 am
    Curious says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I wish this article had more detail. I find it quite curious that the courtroom personnel (judge, baliff, attorneys et al) would allow him to “treat” an ill juror. I can only assume this was some type of extreme medical emergency where immediate care was mandatory.

  • December 28, 2010 at 3:08 am
    Tx says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    We can speculate all day on what went on there in that courtroom. The condition of the juror had to be worse than gastric distress or they wouldn’t have asked him to treat the juror. Unless it was life threatening, I wouldn’t have wanted this doctor to treat me if he was as incompetent as the charges said he was. Hey, call an Ambulance and take me to the hospital.

  • December 29, 2010 at 8:36 am
    nobody important says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Wouldn’t the doctor be sued again if they didn’t provide medical aid? They are still a doctor and have to provide aid if they are there, don’t they? I’m not too terribly choosey when I am in pain.

  • December 29, 2010 at 9:41 am
    Tx says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The court would have an interesting dilemma if they asked this doctor to treat the juror and then something bad happened after the doctor rendered aid. A lawyer would have a field day suing the doctor and the county.

  • December 29, 2010 at 10:19 am
    FLagent/insured says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Hey there is something called a code of ethics. Not only that but we all know theres a 50% chance this is a frivolous lawsuit. It makes me sick that someones whole career can be in question over one incident. I hope they have some good evidence against him.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*