Jurors weigh verdict in malpractice trial involving death of We...

After erading the reports I came to the conclusion there was a breach of duty and care. The jury should award sizable amount to dead mother's family. It is the right thing to do in this case.

after reading

The jurors have a tough call........where does the truth lie ?

Franco wrote:

The jurors have a tough call........where does the truth lie ?

Truth ? The patient is DEAD. Thats the fact and the hospital and staff blew it. Case Closed. Sue them for everything. Rename the Hospital for this lady.

Caveman Bush wrote:

<quoted text>
Truth ? The patient is DEAD. Thats the fact and the hospital and staff blew it. Case Closed. Sue them for everything. Rename the Hospital for this lady.

This is the problem with this country.
Life is not perfect despite all one may do. Eat healthy, exercise, don't smoke, do everything in moderation & you know what, you'll die some day anyway.
Jerks like Country Bush always have someone to blame for everything.

norm wrote:

<quoted text>
This is the problem with this country.
Life is not perfect despite all one may do. Eat healthy, exercise, don't smoke, do everything in moderation & you know what, you'll die some day anyway.
Jerks like Country Bush always have someone to blame for everything.

What does Bush have to do with this? In fact, what does your entire comment have to do with this article?

Mom of High schooler wrote:

<quoted text>
What does Bush have to do with this? In fact, what does your entire comment have to do with this article?

Sorry I was responding to CAVEMAN Bush not COUNTRY Bush's comment.

Mom of High schooler wrote:

<quoted text>
What does Bush have to do with this? In fact, what does your entire comment have to do with this article?

Caveman Bush said the patient died so someone is responsible.
If you don't see what I'm responding to I suggest you look more closely and stop being as superficial as our legal system.

Her water broke a month earlier? Can't it lead to an infection if the baby isn't delivered right away?

So deeply sad for the family.

With doctors going "bare" and not having malpractice coverage, a patient/family will not recover as much $$ as they hope to. Doctors have been busy protecting their assets with trusts, and annuities, so they can not be attached in a lawsuit.

You can bring in all the experts you want and prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the doctors acted responsibly and the jurors will still go with their hearts and find for the plaintiff. That's why medical care costs are skyrocketing. This was a terrible tragedy no doubt, but if expert after expert said that it wasn't the fault of the doctors, that should be the end of the discussion. The reason doctors are "going bare" is that they cannot pay $300K in insurance premiums per year. The family has my deepest sympathy, but I wouldn't agree with their lawsuit.

Any doctor that fails to recommend inducement a month after the water breaks, can result in a patient having a severe internal infection. Despite the testimony of the experts, which contradict the autopsy report, the real question here is whether the Doctor veered away from his usual protocol in dealing with Ms. Special. The same goes for the anethesiologist. If so, then they are liable. Who cares if this guy has done 800 previous without incident, we are talking about this case not the other 800. Who cares about whether everyone in the operating room did everything they could to save her, we are taking about whether that last effort could have been avoided in the first palce. I see the hospital and the doctor(s) as being liable to the Specials absed on a theory of Negligence. The doctor owed a duty to Ms. Special to monitor her vital signs. He and the other gas doctor breached that duty we they failed to realize her vital signs. But for the doctors actions, Ms. Special would probably be alive today. Yet as a result, this family is scared for life and are owed economic and punitive damages in the amount the jury sees fit. Pardon the mis-spelled words, but this is my perspetion. Yes, it is not a perfect world, but when life is at stake, anything less is unaccetable!

I bet the jury is going to find in favor of the hospital. Plaintiffs lose over 90% of all medical negligence cases. In fact, I would cast my vote for the hospital in this one. Of course it's tragic and sad that this lady died on what should have been a very special day, but it's just going to be too costly to give her family any money. She's gone. Too bad. The money could be better spent on renovations, security, medications, etc. and it would benefit many more people. I'd say a sympathy card for the husband and a waive of all her medical bills is about all I would do. I don't have anything against people who choose to sue when they're hurt, but I just don't think we should be allowed to attack our healthcare facilites or our bills will keep increasing.

Very sad wrote:

You can bring in all the experts you want and prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the doctors acted responsibly and the jurors will still go with their hearts and find for the plaintiff. That's why medical care costs are skyrocketing. This was a terrible tragedy no doubt, but if expert after expert said that it wasn't the fault of the doctors, that should be the end of the discussion. The reason doctors are "going bare" is that they cannot pay $300K in insurance premiums per year. The family has my deepest sympathy, but I wouldn't agree with their lawsuit.

This guy is right.

Remember this. No matter what the jury awards or does not award (which is the right thing to do!!!!) the scum bag lawyers will take 80cents of every dollar.
ACCIDENTS HAPPEN. EVERY HUMAN BEING RESPONDS DIFFERETLY UNDER MEDICATION AND STRESS. THATS THE END OF IT!!!!

I was wondering the same thing. I understand that as soon as the water breaks, delivery procedures start to be taken.
Anyway, I am so sorry that this mom died on delivery. As another poster said, it is a tough call for the jury. Sometimes things go wrong in the OR, could be nature or negligence, that'a what the law should determine based on tha facts. Regardless of the outcome, I wish the family the best, considering the circumstances.

Kristy Rhodes wrote:

Her water broke a month earlier? Can't it lead to an infection if the baby isn't delivered right away?

Teddy DuChamp wrote:

Any doctor that fails to recommend inducement a month after the water breaks, can result in a patient having a severe internal infection. Despite the testimony of the experts, which contradict the autopsy report, the real question here is whether the Doctor veered away from his usual protocol in dealing with Ms. Special. The same goes for the anethesiologist. If so, then they are liable. Who cares if this guy has done 800 previous without incident, we are talking about this case not the other 800. Who cares about whether everyone in the operating room did everything they could to save her, we are taking about whether that last effort could have been avoided in the first palce. I see the hospital and the doctor(s) as being liable to the Specials absed on a theory of Negligence. The doctor owed a duty to Ms. Special to monitor her vital signs. He and the other gas doctor breached that duty we they failed to realize her vital signs. But for the doctors actions, Ms. Special would probably be alive today. Yet as a result, this family is scared for life and are owed economic and punitive damages in the amount the jury sees fit. Pardon the mis-spelled words, but this is my perspetion. Yes, it is not a perfect world, but when life is at stake, anything less is unaccetable!

They aren't suing the obstetrician they are suing the anesthesiologist

Tim wrote:

I bet the jury is going to find in favor of the hospital. Plaintiffs lose over 90% of all medical negligence cases. In fact, I would cast my vote for the hospital in this one. Of course it's tragic and sad that this lady died on what should have been a very special day, but it's just going to be too costly to give her family any money. She's gone. Too bad. The money could be better spent on renovations, security, medications, etc. and it would benefit many more people. I'd say a sympathy card for the husband and a waive of all her medical bills is about all I would do. I don't have anything against people who choose to sue when they're hurt, but I just don't think we should be allowed to attack our healthcare facilites or our bills will keep increasing.

What do you do for a living? I feel that this country should have gone universal healthcare years ago- the Drs. and the hospitals are money driven- its a business- whereas it should not be considered money first-lives second. If your water breaks, birth should be within 24-36 hours-period. He should've admitted her and attempted to turn the baby. I gave birth (w/o a C section)and my baby was Frank Breach (jack knifed and butt first). Ms. Special's death was untimely and unnecessary.

Nicks Mom wrote:

<quoted text>
What do you do for a living? I feel that this country should have gone universal healthcare years ago- the Drs. and the hospitals are money driven- its a business- whereas it should not be considered money first-lives second. If your water breaks, birth should be within 24-36 hours-period. He should've admitted her and attempted to turn the baby. I gave birth (w/o a C section)and my baby was Frank Breach (jack knifed and butt first). Ms. Special's death was untimely and unnecessary.

Universal health care? Settle down there Hilary. Just ask the Canadians how their healthcare is going. They all come to the States for their care. Long waits, poor care. Do you really want our government running our healtcare? I give you, HRS, TSA, FEMA. I'll take free market healthcare anyday.