Man Claims Hospital Forced Rectal Exam Upon Him

[bnhall]

Yes, anyone should be able to refuse treatment. But if they do, neither them nor their family should be able to sue the hospital. Period.

Doctors are trained to save patients' lives. He was hit in the head. He could have easily had a spinal injury. The doctor was doing what he was supposed to do. People who have undergone trauma, especially head trauma, often act belligerent. Doctors still have to do their jobs. This man doesn't deserve a penny.

 

[White Rain]

Yes, anyone should be able to refuse treatment. But if they do, neither them nor their family should be able to sue the hospital. Period.

Doctors are trained to save patients' lives. He was hit in the head. He could have easily had a spinal injury. The doctor was doing what he was supposed to do. People who have undergone trauma, especially head trauma, often act belligerent. Doctors still have to do their jobs. This man doesn't deserve a penny.

I don't necessarily believe that he shouldn't sue, or that he doesn't deserve any money.
IF his story is true, he didn't want the exam yet it was forced upon him anyway...he was given something to knock him out, and then his body was violated against his wishes and after he begged them not to do this.
If he is telling the truth he deserves every dime he's asking for...and then some....

 

[kgeaux]

If you google: "spine injury" rectal
You will get a number of hits in books that say that a rectal exam is essential in assessing a trauma patient for spine injury. Apparently, the way the sphincter reacts to the invasion is an indicator of whether everything is working.

:crazy: :crazy: :crazy: Ya got me spitting coffee, girl. Love that sense of humor!

 

[wildTrose]

Maybe the man was abused at sometime in his life and this is why he was so dead set on not wanting the exam.....If his story is true and there is always two sides, then I think he deserves to sue them and should be awarded. You have the right to say no to medical treatment. He refused but they did the exam anyway after he was drugged....kinda like a date rape drug

 

[Marthatex]

Yes, I would like to know why they felt they had to sedate him and go ahead with the exam. It will be interesting to see how they judge it, anyway.

I just don't buy the "he can't work", and he's "totally messed up now" aspect of it.

Hey, I'll be glad to go get a rectal exam right NOW for a couple mil; no sweat!

 

[Marthatex]

I didn't exactly want that big huge stick where it was put when the doctor broke my water both times my kids were born. THAT wasn't pleasant either, but I didn't punch the doctor out. I didn't punch any nurses or doctors when they had to check my dialation 10,000 times, even that one nurse with the really sharp fingernails. No, I held it together. A rectal exam is nothing compared to what women delivering children put up with, and many women have had prior abuse. So, I'm not buying any sob stories for this guy.:boohoo:

aint that the truth!!

 

[Pharlap]

Well since this has been bought to everyones attention, if it happened to him, it could happen to us.
If I ever have to go to the hospital, the first thing out of my mouth is, NO, NOTA rectal exam......my lawyer is on his way.

:crazy:

 

[j2mirish]

OK, after googling around I found out some more info. For one thing, he wasn't just "flailing around" as his lawyer said, he actually got a hand loose and punched the doctor.

Also, it was a resident who treated him. This rectal exam is absolute protocol for suspected spinal cord trauma. I'm sure this resident felt he had to follow protocol, because he or she has to report back to the attending doctor who is responsible for that resident's job security; and probably expects procedure A,B,C to be followed or ELSE. Anybody watch Grey's Anatomy?

The guy was hit on the head by a beam. Now what if they had not followed procedure, he went home and he did indeed have injury and severe problems. I bet he would sue in that case also.

For spinal cord trauma: 5-minute Neurology Consult includes: "A detailed neurologic exam, including rectal tone, is necessary to identify level and completeness of injury." http://books.google.com/books?id=At...sig=6hIqbHPxNYijfa6AS5DhtCDvEfg#PRA1-PA421,M1

Oh well, that's a big one. Now I can understand that this guy would be pissed, but "can't work"? It hinges on whether the hospital employees determined he was "out of his head", not rational, etc.

Clearly this man is out for some money and so are his attorneys, but they may get it. And if it's millions of dollars, than we are all the poorer for it. It's not like he had the wrong foot amputated or a serious diagnosis missed and someone died of cancer.

What turned out to be a pain in the rear end may be quite lucrative for him.

thanks Martha- that has been my question to begin with
I sooooooooooo hate lawsuits- especially years down the road-

 

[pixies]

NO means NO.
Even if you say NO to a DR. It still means the same thing.


(but what an odd case)

 

[T-Rex]

I think, in any business, you have to learn to work WITH your client. Nothing gives you the right, while working on THEIR account, to force your opinion down their throat. Or up their ass, as the case may be! That resident has a lot to learn.

 

[bakerprune64]

NEW YORK — A construction worker claimed in a lawsuit that when he went to a hospital after being hit on the forehead by a falling wooden beam, emergency room staffers forcibly gave him a rectal examination.
Brian Persaud, 38, says in court papers that after he denied a request by NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital emergency room employees to examine his rectum, he was "assaulted, battered and falsely imprisoned."
His lawyer, Gerrard M. Marrone, said he and Persaud later learned the exam was one way of determining whether he had suffered spinal damage in the accident.
Marrone said his client got eight stitches for a cut over his eyebrow.
Then, Marrone said, emergency room staffers insisted on examining his rectum and held him down while he begged, "Please don't do that." He said Persaud hit a doctor while flailing around and staffers gave him an injection, which knocked him out, and performed the rectal exam.
more: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,323186,00.html

Exit only!!

 

[Marthatex]

I think, in any business, you have to learn to work WITH your client. Nothing gives you the right, while working on THEIR account, to force your opinion down their throat. Or up their ass, as the case may be! That resident has a lot to learn.

If the ER is a "business"; it definitely services at least 1/3 of people who don't pay, can't pay, or don't have any intention of paying for their services.

It's crowded, you wait for hours, because they have fewer ERs, fewer ER doctors, etc. etc. YEt the workers must adhere to the strictest procedures and ethics, and not make any mistakes. Not only that, patients will hit them, throw up on them, verbally abuse them, sometimes come in an SHOOT them.

So there are two lenses to look through in each case; the life of the doctor or nurse, and the life of the patient, which of course is of utmost to save.

Every you ever heard of a losing "business" like that? It's frustrating on both sides, is what I'm saying.

 

[TheShadow]

Patients have the right to refuse any treatment. They have the right to walk out of a hospital against Dr's orders. They have to sign a waiver acknowledging that what they are doing is a risk and they are assuming the risk associated with their actions. The only exception would be if they are unconscious and unable to consent or mentally incompetent to make the decision, ie:51-50. This guy will win. Although I totally do not buy the unable to work and stressed out years later BS. No way I would give him millions if I was on the jury, but I would give him something for sure.

 

[kgeaux]

Yes, I would like to know why they felt they had to sedate him and go ahead with the exam. It will be interesting to see how they judge it, anyway.

I just don't buy the "he can't work", and he's "totally messed up now" aspect of it.

Hey, I'll be glad to go get a rectal exam right NOW for a couple mil; no sweat!

I can't wait to hear the hospital's side of the story. It seems excessive to me to have fought with the patient and sedated him when he refused treatment; to have had him arrested for trying to defend himself against what he perceived to be an assault was just nuts, IMO.

I have an aquaintance who was both the victim of childhood sexual abuse and rape as an adult: you would not believe the problems she has. She suffers from post-traumatic stress syndrome, and she cannot hold a job down. Rape and abuse affect the person to a tremendously damaging degree, and I'm not so sure this man's claims are false.

Exit only!!

That's what I'm talking about!

Patients have the right to refuse any treatment. They have the right to walk out of a hospital against Dr's orders. They have to sign a waiver acknowledging that what they are doing is a risk and they are assuming the risk associated with their actions. The only exception would be if they are unconscious and unable to consent or mentally incompetent to make the decision, ie:51-50. This guy will win. Although I totally do not buy the unable to work and stressed out years later BS. No way I would give him millions if I was on the jury, but I would give him something for sure.

You've hit on the crux of the matter, IMO. Why wasn't he allowed to refuse treatment? IF he was displaying some signs of mental instability, would that be enough for the intern to force treatment upon him?

 

[crypto6]

Patients have the right to refuse any treatment. They have the right to walk out of a hospital against Dr's orders. They have to sign a waiver acknowledging that what they are doing is a risk and they are assuming the risk associated with their actions. The only exception would be if they are unconscious and unable to consent or mentally incompetent to make the decision, ie:51-50. This guy will win. Although I totally do not buy the unable to work and stressed out years later BS. No way I would give him millions if I was on the jury, but I would give him something for sure.

This is a weird one. If he were competent, which is questionable with his CHI, he certainly has the right to refuse any treatment. If he was not competent, the MD's judgement determines what is done as an examination. However, we usually don't do rectals on trauma unless we have other evidence of cord injury. There are so many other non- invasive physical exams we can do that usually we don't need a rectal.

RE: Substituting an X-ray for an exam. X-rays often don't reveal cord trauma. You could use a CT to check bony anatomy and an MRI to asess the cord, but still have to do some type of exam or risk not catching all injuries.

There's something very hinky here. I await more facts.

Crypto6

 

[Rino]

First, what a crybaby looking for a lawsuit. Man up already. It's your butt and they are medical professionals. They see more asses than the Grand Canyon tours and they don't really dig it.

Now he wants money coming out the wazoo

 

[T-Rex]

Ha ha ha!
Their defense will be the doctors know best, and did it for his own good.
Doctors used to give women thalidimide for their own good. They used to automatically give them hysterectomies at menopause for their own good. They still deliver an alarming amount of babies by C-section--up to 40% at some hospitals--for their own good.

 

[Marthatex]

This is a weird one. If he were competent, which is questionable with his CHI, he certainly has the right to refuse any treatment. If he was not competent, the MD's judgement determines what is done as an examination. However, we usually don't do rectals on trauma unless we have other evidence of cord injury. There are so many other non- invasive physical exams we can do that usually we don't need a rectal.

RE: Substituting an X-ray for an exam. X-rays often don't reveal cord trauma. You could use a CT to check bony anatomy and an MRI to asess the cord, but still have to do some type of exam or risk not catching all injuries.

There's something very hinky here. I await more facts.

Crypto6

We have only heard the side, through the media, of the patient and his attorneys. The hospital isn't talking.

So really, there may be another side to the story. The fact that the hospital was not willing to make any kind of settlement leads me to believe that they feel they can win.

 

[Marthatex]

Ha ha ha!
Their defense will be the doctors know best, and did it for his own good.
Doctors used to give women thalidimide for their own good. They used to automatically give them hysterectomies at menopause for their own good. They still deliver an alarming amount of babies by C-section--up to 40% at some hospitals--for their own good.

Yes, but doctors also save lives, and are mighty handy during an emergency; and a suspected spinal cord injury needs immediate treatment.

 

[gman20001969]

Why coudn't they write in thier report, "Paitient refused rectum exam" and had been done with it?