Re: Recommending surgeons on this forum

[Guest guest]

I'm with Jane on this one although I do not encourage slander in any

forum, be it verbal or online. Tell it to their face. But I do think

Jane has made a good point about how by voicing ones own concerns

about their own surgeon, other members are encouraged to look at

their own surgeon critically with the end result being either:

a) you realize that actually ur not comfortable with ur surgeon

or

what luck! you've got a brilliant surgeon and now you can relax!

Word of mouth is the way the world works these days. I get asked all

the time by first year students what I thought about this professor

and this class and if I thought the prof or the class was crap well

damn them if they sue me, I'm telling the honest truth. Same goes for

advice from my previous clients about which journalists to approach

or which agency was better. I was paid to tell them who was crap and

who wasn't. If you base it on legal terms none of the comments on

this site could be sued for libel unless one member were to

repeatedly slander a doctor and publicly use his or her name. I

believe that most of the comments that have been posted here have

been along the lines of that the patient in question was not happy

with the way they were handling bed-side manner wise and not in terms

of the actual medical job done. And there's not much a doctor can sue

in regards to that. If one of your patients thought u were a jerk

such is life. Happens to the best of us. And as Jane pointed out the

only time names have been mentioned has been in relation to

recommendations. Complaints have been made regarding anonymous

doctors.

Enough of my ranting. I fear this discussion has gotten too

political. Let's focus on the end game here and that's supporting

each other throughout this arduous process.

Sara

> > > >

> > > > Not the best idea ever offered, posting specifically about

> docs,

> > with

> > > > names.

> > > >

> > > > Most of us do indeed think our surgeons were quite wonderful.

> And

> > some

> > > > of those have been named. But someone who succumbs to the yen

> to

> > vent

> > > > negative blasts, for whatever reason, about a doc (or anyone

> else

> > > > named) opens him or herself to legal liabilities. I think.

[Guest guest]

Friends, and I feel you ARE my friends...

I'm just trying to keep us all out of litigation.

Hey! we need the $$$ to pay the surgeons who do right by us, no?

Yes. YES!!! Voice your concerns to your docs, therapists, anybody

else. But don't voice them to a big other world out there. You can

spend months, years, even decades in very expensive courtrooms

defending things you posted that health care providers (and their

attorneys) may find beyond the pale.

That said, I will tell you that I believe I and my spouse have

actionable cases against at least a couple of foul docs (not orthos,

nor oral surgeons), but would not bring suit because it would be a

source of undying pain for us at a time when we do not need it.

Courtrooms are not places I want to be.

No way am I suggesting that you swallow your troubles. Talk long,

well, honestly and earnestly with your caregivers. And if you find

them unresponsive, and can document their mishandling of your case,

sue the pants off of them, and plan to pay your lawyer lavish fees.

Most of the judgment, in fact. And I've never had a problem with a

doc. Ours have all been really wonderful.

But I really believe that such malpractice cases are few and far

between. I think most docs work that hard because they want to help

folks. They want the money, too. But they really do want to help.

Of course, Jane, you should be vocal with your docs about your

complaints, and I don't blame you -- as I hope you know -- for the

ones you've voiced here.

I also think you should be vocal, orally, with friends who might

find themselves or their children in the care of this person. ( " nuff

said? I believe in word of mouth, too.)

But I think you would be opening yourself to unwelcome and

unnecessary troubles to post something negative on the internet.

Docs may not have the time to read it, but they do indeed have the

money to hire folks who used to be known as " clip services " in the

old days of paper and hot type, to keep track of what's being said

about them. Sad that it's all come to this, I know.

And oh, CPT Bob -- " How would you feel if a lay person started

second

guessing your ability to do your job without having all of the

facts?

It is not just about liability but rather about courtesy and

professionalism. "

Honey chile. I am a journalist. We've had an awful spate here lately

of priests who needed a bunch of second-guessing. -care

systems which needed likewise. All of us, including moi, need to

take our lumps with the best of it. Just not do it in an actionable

circumstance, if we haven't sufficient back-up documentation. And

that doesn't mean " I said. He said. She said. " Not enough to hit

print, methinks.

I just lately had a public embarrassment over a story I wrote, which

had something I'd checked and double checked with sources before it

went into print. But my major boss pulled the carpet out from under

me, with no discussion of the matter.

There are 15 people daily who want to tell me how to do my job.

(I've been in the biz for 30-some years now.) Even though they

haven't a clue that if I let my newspaper say that, um, Jack -- of

the beanstalk fame -- might be a mass killer -- I could be put under

the jail by Jack's son-in-law because I reported that he had a

shovel in his driveway.)

....

Noooooooh. I don't know Jack. Don't think that his victims

fertilized his big beanstalk. Wish I'd never mentioned Jack!!! We

are careful, too, and often get bitten by the people we're trying to

give decent, honest coverage of their fine acts. OWWW~

C.

And Sonya, whoever suggested this to you was not a veteran libel

defense attorney:

" If someone sues you for libel, you are innocent until they

prove you lied. Which means they have to prove they DIDN'T do what

you said they did. "

Mercifully, I have not libelled anyone I know of, and have not been

so sued. But I wouldn't want to have you on my defense team, if

that's your understanding and approach!

C,

> > > > >

> > > > > Not the best idea ever offered, posting specifically about

> > docs,

> > > with

> > > > > names.

> > > > >

> > > > > Most of us do indeed think our surgeons were quite

wonderful.

> > And

> > > some

> > > > > of those have been named. But someone who succumbs to the

yen

> > to

> > > vent

> > > > > negative blasts, for whatever reason, about a doc (or

anyone

> > else

> > > > > named) opens him or herself to legal liabilities. I think.

[Guest guest]

Just thought I’d add my two cents. I’ve been advised that in situations like

this (personal injury), the attorney typically charges a percentage of what

the attorney recovers for the client. The client pays nothing if the lawyer

gets nothing. The usual percentages that a lawyer gets are 25 to 33% of any

settlement before trial (the bigger the case, the lower the percentage) and

40 to 50% of any amount recovered after a trial starts.

_____

From: ceast36532 [mailto:no_reply ]

Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 10:55 PM

To: orthognathicsurgerysupport

Subject: Re: Recommending surgeons on this

forum

Friends, and I feel you ARE my friends...

I'm just trying to keep us all out of litigation.

Hey! we need the $$$ to pay the surgeons who do right by us, no?

Yes. YES!!! Voice your concerns to your docs, therapists, anybody

else. But don't voice them to a big other world out there. You can

spend months, years, even decades in very expensive courtrooms

defending things you posted that health care providers (and their

attorneys) may find beyond the pale.

That said, I will tell you that I believe I and my spouse have

actionable cases against at least a couple of foul docs (not orthos,

nor oral surgeons), but would not bring suit because it would be a

source of undying pain for us at a time when we do not need it.

Courtrooms are not places I want to be.

No way am I suggesting that you swallow your troubles. Talk long,

well, honestly and earnestly with your caregivers. And if you find

them unresponsive, and can document their mishandling of your case,

sue the pants off of them, and plan to pay your lawyer lavish fees.

Most of the judgment, in fact. And I've never had a problem with a

doc. Ours have all been really wonderful.

But I really believe that such malpractice cases are few and far

between. I think most docs work that hard because they want to help

folks. They want the money, too. But they really do want to help.

Of course, Jane, you should be vocal with your docs about your

complaints, and I don't blame you -- as I hope you know -- for the

ones you've voiced here.

I also think you should be vocal, orally, with friends who might

find themselves or their children in the care of this person. ( " nuff

said? I believe in word of mouth, too.)

But I think you would be opening yourself to unwelcome and

unnecessary troubles to post something negative on the internet.

Docs may not have the time to read it, but they do indeed have the

money to hire folks who used to be known as " clip services " in the

old days of paper and hot type, to keep track of what's being said

about them. Sad that it's all come to this, I know.

And oh, CPT Bob -- " How would you feel if a lay person started

second

guessing your ability to do your job without having all of the

facts?

It is not just about liability but rather about courtesy and

professionalism. "

Honey chile. I am a journalist. We've had an awful spate here lately

of priests who needed a bunch of second-guessing. -care

systems which needed likewise. All of us, including moi, need to

take our lumps with the best of it. Just not do it in an actionable

circumstance, if we haven't sufficient back-up documentation. And

that doesn't mean " I said. He said. She said. " Not enough to hit

print, methinks.

I just lately had a public embarrassment over a story I wrote, which

had something I'd checked and double checked with sources before it

went into print. But my major boss pulled the carpet out from under

me, with no discussion of the matter.

There are 15 people daily who want to tell me how to do my job.

(I've been in the biz for 30-some years now.) Even though they

haven't a clue that if I let my newspaper say that, um, Jack -- of

the beanstalk fame -- might be a mass killer -- I could be put under

the jail by Jack's son-in-law because I reported that he had a

shovel in his driveway.)

...

Noooooooh. I don't know Jack. Don't think that his victims

fertilized his big beanstalk. Wish I'd never mentioned Jack!!! We

are careful, too, and often get bitten by the people we're trying to

give decent, honest coverage of their fine acts. OWWW~

C.

And Sonya, whoever suggested this to you was not a veteran libel

defense attorney:

" If someone sues you for libel, you are innocent until they

prove you lied. Which means they have to prove they DIDN'T do what

you said they did. "

Mercifully, I have not libelled anyone I know of, and have not been

so sued. But I wouldn't want to have you on my defense team, if

that's your understanding and approach!

C,

> > > > >

> > > > > Not the best idea ever offered, posting specifically about

> > docs,

> > > with

> > > > > names.

> > > > >

> > > > > Most of us do indeed think our surgeons were quite

wonderful.

> > And

> > > some

> > > > > of those have been named. But someone who succumbs to the

yen

> > to

> > > vent

> > > > > negative blasts, for whatever reason, about a doc (or

anyone

> > else

> > > > > named) opens him or herself to legal liabilities. I think.

_____

[Guest guest]

Jane,

I did not mean to imply that you should not question your doctors! In

fact, a client who has made an efort to educate themselves on the

subject and who can ask appropriate questions is a great client. And

a good doctor, in my opinion, should not be threatened by pointed

questions and will consider the clients feelings and emotional state

at all times. The same doctors should be open to the possibility that

they DO make mistakes--we all do. My point is that we should be

careful in criticizing specific doctors by name on this type of

forum. We are talking about doctors on this forum, but my comments

apply to any profession. Your comments/complaint/frustrations that

you have voiced seem to be sound and have been appropriate. But, I

don't remember you naming a specific doctor.

With all of that said, if you feel compelled to tell a specific

person that you think Dr X is a horrible doctor then an off-line e-

mail would be more than appropriate.

CPT Bob

> > > >

> > > > Not the best idea ever offered, posting specifically about

> docs,

> > with

> > > > names.

> > > >

> > > > Most of us do indeed think our surgeons were quite wonderful.

> And

> > some

> > > > of those have been named. But someone who succumbs to the yen

> to

> > vent

> > > > negative blasts, for whatever reason, about a doc (or anyone

> else

> > > > named) opens him or herself to legal liabilities. I think.

[Guest guest]

Sara,

I do not disagree with anything you have said in your post. I think

the reality is that we are more in agreement than previously thought.

CPT Bob

> > > > >

> > > > > Not the best idea ever offered, posting specifically about

> > docs,

> > > with

> > > > > names.

> > > > >

> > > > > Most of us do indeed think our surgeons were quite

wonderful.

> > And

> > > some

> > > > > of those have been named. But someone who succumbs to the

yen

> > to

> > > vent

> > > > > negative blasts, for whatever reason, about a doc (or

anyone

> > else

> > > > > named) opens him or herself to legal liabilities. I think.

[Guest guest]

Cammie,

I believe there is a difference between second guessing a

professional and bringing to light serious criminal activities.

Second guessing is usually done without appropriate knowledge of the

situation. Criminal activity should always be brought to light.

CPT Bob

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Not the best idea ever offered, posting specifically

about

> > > docs,

> > > > with

> > > > > > names.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Most of us do indeed think our surgeons were quite

> wonderful.

> > > And

> > > > some

> > > > > > of those have been named. But someone who succumbs to the

> yen

> > > to

> > > > vent

> > > > > > negative blasts, for whatever reason, about a doc (or

> anyone

> > > else

> > > > > > named) opens him or herself to legal liabilities. I

think.