Reply #134: Prior Probabilites

[panzerfaust]

One need "not know jack" about individual cases - other than the outcome - to be able to guess as to whether standard of care was met.

In this case, a generally non-fatal injury, death apparently occurred by loss of the airway during transport FROM a hospital following snakebite to the head.

The report states that the family was worried because the patient was having respiratory difficulty, the report also alleges delay in treatment. The hosptial denies this latter. Given the unexpectedly grim outcome, the allegations of the family seem more probable.

As far as not needing to 'know jack' let me give an example: If someone goes into hospital for replacement of the aortic arch (where all the big arteries to the upper body and head arise) and dies, that is not suggestive that care was substandard (thoug it may have been); however, if a healthy one-year old comes for ear-tubes, and leaves brain-dead that does raise the question of the adequacy of care. Sure, might have been an imaginably rare genetic problem, but, more likely (as in the case burned in my mind) it was active neglect by the anesthesia care provider.

In spite of popular belief, most medical lawsuits do not happen because the family wants to become rich, most medical lawsuits happen because the family is angry. Ridiculing someone's religious practices, then ending up with a dead patient - especially when the probability is that the patient should have lived - is a durn good way to get sued.