Can I sue my cardiologist for this?

Forums: Legal, Medical Malpractice, Ask A Lawyer, Call A Lawyer, Get A Lawyer
Email this Topic • Print this Page

My question involves medical malpractice in the state of: North Carolina

First, I am SORRY for making this long but it is the shortest I could make it to include ALL the relevant details.

I was referred to a cardiologist by my pediatrician for a murmur. On the referral form it says "Evaluate new murmur - possible functional". Pediatrician also sent me to a hospital for EKG, which I get done at hospital. Then, days later, I get this voice message from my pediatrician's nurse:

"Left side is enlarged - not sure what's going on - what significance does that mean. I would definitely keep your appointment, they [cardiologist referred to] will discuss the EKG. They'll have this record and go into details of what this means."

However, I heard this message after my visit to cardiologist.

So anyway, I see my cardiologist. We talk about some unrelated stuff and then he briefly asks me some questions. "Do you get chest pain when you're walking, active?" I couldn't finish answering this because I am interrupted. "Does your heart flutter" Couldn't answer this one either because cardiologist interrupts with the following question "Do you ever pass out?" I said 'No'. Then, "Do you have swelling in your legs?" 'No', again. "Do you feel dizzy when you stand up?" 'Maybe like 1 time', was my answer. "Have you ever had a blood clot?" 'No'. "Does your dad have heart trouble?" my answer: 'Yes.' "What kind?" 'I don't know.' "Is there anyone in the family who died suddenly?" 'Yes, my great-grandmother.'

Later on, after testing blood pressure, listening to heart, etc., cardiologist asks me a second time whether I've had swelling in my legs, to which of course I say 'No.' Then asks me if my chest pain gets worse with certain food and not with activity or anything else, to which I said 'Yes, but I still had chest pain after fasting (so it wasn't caused by food).'

Towards the end, he schedules me an ultrasound of heart to see what my murmur is, and noted that he doesn't think it may be "anything serious", and an ultrasound of arteries in neck. He then says "I think we're going to find that your heart is okay ... and if that's the case, things are fine."

In the very end I notice that my cardiologist says absolutely nothing about the EKG he was supposed to "go into details" and that he's preparing to leave, so I ask him about the EKG. His response: "EKG was beautiful." So I get the ultrasounds done, come home, listen to my voice messages and hear my pediatrician's nurse voicemail that says that the EKG showed enlargement. At this point I panic and experience something akin to a trauma. I get extreme worries that my cardiologist has lied to me and wants me to die. I remember that I actually get mixed thoughts; I'd think that maybe nothing can be done to my heart now so I am being lied to and my actual prognosis is death.

A day or two later I receive a call from cardiologist's nurse. She says ultrasound of heart was a "normal study - normal pumping function or squeezing function of heart, no valve disease. So that was a good report ... Ultrasound of arteries showed no plaque on either side and [cardiologist] is not suggesting any changes here. Those [studies] looked really good."

Other pertinent events:

In February of 2012 I experience unusual squeezing chest pain with palpitations that began when walking. It was so bad I was considering going to the hospital's trauma center, but did not.

In March of 2012 I go to my local hospital, with which my cardiologist is affiliated, because of very bad chest pain. I will not share any more information as I do not want to sue the hospital.

In that same month, I have a scheduled follow-up visit with my cardiologist. The only relevant thing I can remember from that visit is that he tells me my heart is "strong" and that I can go swimming. I also got a stress echocardiogram, which, like the first tests, was normal. Below are the details of stress exercise test results:

"A treadmill exercise test according to Ramped Bruce protocol was performed. The baseline ECG displays normal sinus rhythm. No stress induced ST changes to suggest ischemia. Total stress time achieved was 1.6 minutes. A total of 2.7 METS was achieved. This represents 10% of the expected exercise capacity.

Resting heart rate was 108 BPM. Peak heart rate achieved was 131 BPM. This represents 65% of maximum predicated heart rate. Exercise was stopped due to leg pain. Blood pressure at rest was 128/80 mmHg. Blood pressure at peak stress was 138/74 mmHg. No arrhythmia was noted during stress. There was no new ST segment depression with stress. The left ventricle is normal in size. There is no thrombus. There is normal left ventricular wall thickness. Left ventricular systolic function is normal and is estimated at >55%. No regional wall motion abnormalities noted. The right ventricle is grossly normal size.

The left atrium is normal size. Right atrial size is normal. The mitral valve is normal. There is no mitral regurgitation noted. The tricuspid valve is normal in structure and function. No tricuspid regurgitation. The aortic valve moves normally. No hemodynamically significant valvular aortic stenosis. No aortic regurgitation is present. The pulmonic valve is normal in structure and function. There is no pulmonic valvular regurgitation. The aortic root is normal size. The pulmonary artery is normal size. There is no pericardial effusion. There is no pleural effusion. A complete treadmill stress with two-dimensional transthoracic echocardiogram was performed (2D, M-mode, Doppler and color flow Doppler). Technically limited apical views due to cardiac positioning. Low workload achieved. No ischemia at sumaximal heart rate. Left ventricular systolic function is normal and is estimated at >55%. No obvious regional wall motion abnormalities noted."

Here is why I am asking if I can sue this cardiologist:

In May of 2012 I get an echocardiogram at a very reputed hospital, one of the best in my state. This echo shows:

"Normal left ventricular size. Normal left ventricular systolic function. Normal left ventricular wall motion. Normal right ventricular size. Normal right ventricular function. Mild mitral regurgitation. Mild tricuspid regurgitation. Small pericardial effusion. Anterior mitral leaflet prolapse with posteriorly directed jet. Severity of MR jet could be underestimated due to the eccentric jet."

Then says, "Consider echo follow-up."

I also got an EKG at this hospital, which, interestingly, only showed Sinus Tachycardia and no enlargement of heart.

So, do I have a case here and if so, how much would I win, assuming I can find a lawyer and still sue after 2 1/2 years? Also, even though I have seen psychiatrists/psychologists and complained a lot about the trauma received from my experience with this cardiologist and the complete distrust I now have in doctors as a result of the lies, I do NOT wish to include the psychological side in my lawsuit, just the lies.

I am also worried that the cardiologist will argue the prolapse was missed because it's just one leaflet and that my condition worsened in those two months (from stress echo to abnormal echo at reputed hospital). Or, that it simply appeared on that echo and not his as prolapses may rarely go away and re-appear. However, I still do not understand how he acknowledged the murmur I was referred with and then told me the echocardiograms show no regurgitation. I mean, my referring pediatrician said the murmur was III/IV and harsh.

Want expert opinions only and will possibly recompense for honest, helpful advice. Thank you.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 6 • Views: 3,739 • Replies: 32

@disabled1,

Quote:

D. THIS SERVICE DOES NOT PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL LEGAL ADVICE. All of the services' content, including postings, is for informational purposes only. The service is not intended to be a substitute for professional legal advice, and no attorney/client privilege is to be inferred from any postings herein. Always seek the advice of a qualified legal professional with questions you have regarding a legal matter. You should not disregard professional legal advice because of something you have received from or read in the able2know service.

http://able2know.org/about/tos/

1 Reply

@disabled1,

It sounds like your cardiologist performed all appropriate tests to evaluate your heart's functioning and reported the results to you. According to what you have written, the test results were essentially normal.

So where is there any indication of malpractice?

What did the cardiologist fail to do, that a cardiologist is expected to do, in evaluating complaints, and symptoms, of the type you consulted him about?

Subsequent tests, done elsewhere, reported slightly different results, but the conditions under which those tests were done, and the specific type of testing equipment used, may have accounted for those differences. In addition, cardiac functioning may have changed in the interval.

The differing test results do not indicate malpractice on the cardiologist's part--test results may vary for many reasons, and the cardiologist can only report the results he obtains on testing he administered or requested be done.

In what way were you injured by the treatment or diagnostic testing done by this cardiologist, or by his failure to do any treatment or diagnostic testing that a cardiologist is reasonably expected to do? What were his professional errors in judgment, or errors of omission? Where did he deviate from acceptable standards of practice?

I don't think you have described any basis for a malpractice suit against this doctor. Nor have you presented any evidence, at all, that he lied to you.

Have you discussed the differing test results with any cardiologist who has subsequently treated you? Did they offer you an explanation?

If you are interested in pursuing this matter, you should consult a malpractice attorney for an opinion, you are still within the statute of limitations in North Carolina for such a suit . But you need to have some evidence of malpractice, and injury directly resulting from that.

Quote:

What Is North Carolina Malpractice?

To have a legitimate medical malpractice claim in North Carolina, you must first show that your doctor or other relevant medical provider breached, or violated, the standard of care while treating you.

In the context of medical malpractice, the standard of care is the generally accepted practices and procedures used by healthcare professionals in the same geographic area for treating patients with a particular disease or disorder. The standard of care will change depending on the specific disorder, as well as other factors, including the patient's age and overall health.

In addition to violating the standard of care, the doctor's breach must have directly contributed to your injuries to have a valid North Carolina medical malpractice claim. This means you and your attorney will have to show in court that the doctor's actions are the cause of your injuries. Often, this requires the use of outside medical experts to testify on your behalf.
http://www.attorneys.com/medical-malpractice/north-carolina/north-carolina-medical-malpractice-basics/

1 Reply

@firefly,

"It sounds like your cardiologist performed all appropriate tests to evaluate your heart's functioning and reported the results to you. According to what you have written, the test results were essentially normal. So where is there any indication of malpractice? What did the cardiologist fail to do, that a cardiologist is expected to do, in evaluating complaints, and symptoms, of the type you consulted him about?"

The cardiologist lied about my test results. As I said, I was referred with a harsh, grade III/IV murmur, which if you don't know, means someone has a regurgitation of the valve (please correct me if I'm wrong). This cardiologist says later in the records that he did not "mention" I had the prolapse and regurgitations. So, what does "mention" mean, here?

"The differing test results do not indicate malpractice on the cardiologist's part--test results may vary for many reasons, and the cardiologist can only report the results he obtains on testing he administered or requested be done."

Wrong. At the least, he knew I had a murmur and it clearly means I have a mitral and/or tricuspid (as in my case) regurgitation which should have been noted in the echocardiogram results. Again, his report was my heart is "really good." And please read my previous reply.

"In what way were you injured by the treatment or diagnostic testing done by this cardiologist, or by his failure to do any treatment or diagnostic testing that a cardiologist is reasonably expected to do? What were his professional errors in judgment, or errors of omission? Where did he deviate from acceptable standards of practice?"

Errors in judgment and omission: Not diagnosing the regurgitations and prolapse. He deviated by not diagnosing these conditions when they were clearly present (arguably the prolapse though, which still makes no sense how he couldn't see the damn prolapse giving me a shooting eccentric jet). My prolapse seems to not give off a click, however when I listen I hear a click I've matched with samples online so I think it's actually there if an honest doctors listens to me, which is 100% evidence of a prolapse to my knowledge.

"I don't think you have described any basis for a malpractice suit against this doctor. Nor have you presented any evidence, at all, that he lied to you."

So do you want the actual records where in the span of 2 months I get a test result that has everything normal, and one that has a moderate, not slight, change, of not only my heart valves leaking but also a prolapse? Sure, but what do I get out this? Proving I'm not lying, according to you?

"Have you discussed the differing test results with any cardiologist who has subsequently treated you? Did they offer you an explanation?"

No, I am afraid of discussing this because I am paranoid. I need a lawyer's doctor or something.

"If you are interested in pursuing this matter, you should consult a malpractice attorney for an opinion, you are still within the statute of limitations in North Carolina for such a suit . But you need to have some evidence of malpractice, and injury directly resulting from that."

I've contacted about 50 lawyers today and only have about 5 that are interested out of all those. Why? Because there is no physical injury that I can prove and mental reasons will not make me any money. The others say that I need written second opinion saying there was negligence (good luck me trying to actually have a doctor go against another cardiologist LOL), so I guess I can go to court with just proving he lied but then how much money am I actually going to make? *Sigh*

Lying to patients should be a big offense and just by virtue of the lie I should be getting like thousands of dollars. I believe this just gives doctors freedom to lie as long as they see I won't have physical injury and even then they're going to lie so much with all their little affiliated hospitals and !@#.

Disappointed in the legal system here.

2 Replies

@disabled1,

I reall

Quote:

y really doubt that you will able to build a case. As Firelfly noticed the cardiologist made everything under normal procedure. I shall complement with the technical aspects of your tests.

Quote:

"Left side is enlarged - not sure what's going on - what significance does that mean. I would definitely keep your appointment, they [cardiologist referred to] will discuss the EKG. They'll have this record and go into details of what this means."

EKG is a completely interpretative study. It can not stnad alone as a diagnosis test for an appropiate evaluation. It depends completely on the clinical experience of the doctor. The dignosis is done in conjuction with the physical exploration and clinical history. Many graduate doctors have huge problems reading EKG correctly. And many of them commit a bigger mistake, some EKG machines provide an electronic interpretation made by the machine. This is stupid, as i said before EKG is useless without the clinical evaluation (i once saw a 17 year old girl a high performance athlete with a perfect health to whom a EKG machine reported old heart infarction, ventricular hypertrophy and new heart infarction).

What must doctors do is refer the patient to an specialist that has more experience with EKG, of course with a note on what is their fear.

The more EKG experienced specialists are Cardiologists, Internal medicine doctors, and Emergency specialists.

Quote:

So anyway, I see my cardiologist. We talk about some unrelated stuff and then he briefly asks me some questions. "Do you get chest pain when you're walking, active?" I couldn't finish answering this because I am interrupted. "Does your heart flutter" Couldn't answer this one either because cardiologist interrupts with the following question "Do you ever pass out?" I said 'No'. Then, "Do you have swelling in your legs?" 'No', again. "Do you feel dizzy when you stand up?" 'Maybe like 1 time', was my answer. "Have you ever had a blood clot?" 'No'. "Does your dad have heart trouble?" my answer: 'Yes.' "What kind?" 'I don't know.' "Is there anyone in the family who died suddenly?" 'Yes, my great-grandmother.'

This questions are of upmost importance, they help evaluate if there really is a cardiac problem.

Quote:

In the very end I notice that my cardiologist says absolutely nothing about the EKG he was supposed to "go into details" and that he's preparing to leave, so I ask him about the EKG. His response: "EKG was beautiful."

After performing his questions and making a phisical exploration he noticed that the EKG findings where irrelevant. Even more important, for the evaluation of a murmur the EKG is useless. The phrase the EKG was beutiful is a smooth way to try and make you relax. Of course he saw it. But didn´t found relation to your complaints.

BTW the clinical formula to evaluate the size of the left ventricle has a rate of false positives that goes up to 40 per cent. It means 4 in 10 patients diagnosed as left side enlargment by EKG alone will have a completely normal left side of the heart.

Quote:

"A treadmill exercise test according to Ramped Bruce protocol was performed. The baseline ECG displays normal sinus rhythm. No stress induced ST changes to suggest ischemia. Total stress time achieved was 1.6 minutes. A total of 2.7 METS was achieved. This represents 10% of the expected exercise capacity.

Resting heart rate was 108 BPM. Peak heart rate achieved was 131 BPM. This represents 65% of maximum predicated heart rate. Exercise was stopped due to leg pain. Blood pressure at rest was 128/80 mmHg. Blood pressure at peak stress was 138/74 mmHg. No arrhythmia was noted during stress. There was no new ST segment depression with stress. The left ventricle is normal in size. There is no thrombus. There is normal left ventricular wall thickness. Left ventricular systolic function is normal and is estimated at >55%. No regional wall motion abnormalities noted. The right ventricle is grossly normal size.

The left atrium is normal size. Right atrial size is normal. The mitral valve is normal. There is no mitral regurgitation noted. The tricuspid valve is normal in structure and function. No tricuspid regurgitation. The aortic valve moves normally. No hemodynamically significant valvular aortic stenosis. No aortic regurgitation is present. The pulmonic valve is normal in structure and function. There is no pulmonic valvular regurgitation. The aortic root is normal size. The pulmonary artery is normal size. There is no pericardial effusion. There is no pleural effusion. A complete treadmill stress with two-dimensional transthoracic echocardiogram was performed (2D, M-mode, Doppler and color flow Doppler). Technically limited apical views due to cardiac positioning. Low workload achieved. No ischemia at sumaximal heart rate. Left ventricular systolic function is normal and is estimated at >55%. No obvious regional wall motion abnormalities noted."

All of this are the really important exams, and quoting your cardiologist:

They are beautiful!!!

Quote:

In May of 2012 I get an echocardiogram at a very reputed hospital, one of the best in my state. This echo shows:

"Normal left ventricular size. Normal left ventricular systolic function. Normal left ventricular wall motion. Normal right ventricular size. Normal right ventricular function. Mild mitral regurgitation. Mild tricuspid regurgitation. Small pericardial effusion. Anterior mitral leaflet prolapse with posteriorly directed jet. Severity of MR jet could be underestimated due to the eccentric jet."

Then says, "Consider echo follow-up."

This are normal findings on a young patient with functional murmur. But even if there is no murmur many factors can alter the EKG findings, like some medical drugs, hormone alterations, food (coke, black tea, chocolate, rye), emotional factors (anxiety, stress), hydration state. At the end they recommend an echo follow up. which actually was reported as normal.

If you saw a pediatrician it means you where less than 16 years old. During the teen years the body mas,s muscle mass and longitudinal growth change drastically and greatedly, so the heart rapidly has to adapt to the new physical demands. So quick physiological and hemodinamical changes are completely common.

Quote:

I also got an EKG at this hospital, which, interestingly, only showed Sinus Tachycardia and no enlargement of heart.

Again EKG is completely interpretational, if your symptoms and physical findings do not show disease the EKG looses power for diagnosis.

Quote:

So, do I have a case here and if so, how much would I win

I honestly think that this is what really is fueling your question.

Go and ask an experienced lawyer. I really doubt that you will win such case.

1 Reply

@disabled1,

And BTW the most important part of all this is that your heart is fine. You are healthy.

0 Replies

@disabled1,

Quote:

I've contacted about 50 lawyers today and only have about 5 that are interested out of all those. Why? Because there is no physical injury that I can prove and that mental will not make me any money

That's true--for a malpractice suit you must be able to show you were injured by either a doctor's actions or his failures to act. The suit is seeking monetary compensation for those injuries. Without evidence of injuries directly related to the doctor's negligence (departure from acceptable standards of care), you have no basis for a damage suit.

Quote:

The others say that I need written second opinion saying there was negligence (good luck me trying to actually have a doctor go against another cardiologist LOL),

Because malpractice involves deviation from the standard of care you do need a statement from another physician attesting to the fact that your cardiologist did deviate from that standard of care.

Quote:

Errors in judgment and omission: Not diagnosing the regurgitations and prolapse. He deviated by not diagnosing these conditions when they were clearly present (arguably the prolapse though, which still makes no sense how he couldn't see the damn prolapse giving me a shooting eccentric jet).

Those things may not have "been clearly present" on the echo done by the cardiologist, or more accurately, clearly visible on his echo. Even on the hospital's echo, the regurgitations are considered "mild".

You are assuming that all echocardiograms of the same person should yield the same results. That is not always the case. There are different types of echoes, the visualization of the heart may differ, the image quality may differ, the conditions of testing may differ, interpretations may differ--test results can vary for all sorts of reasons, and the test can yield both false positive results and false negative results, and when discrepant results are obtained, you simply do additional testing until results are consistent or the reason for the discrepancy is clarified. After the echo you had at the hospital, they did recommend another echo. Your cardiologist found the echo he had done to be normal, there was no reason for him to do further testing.

Quote:

I guess I can go to court with just proving he lied but then how much money am I actually going to make?

Proving he lied won't make you any money--unless the lie, regarding diagnosis or treatment caused you to directly suffer an actual injury. But, if you feel he lied about your test results, and maliciously told you something other than what the echo result actually indicated, you could file an ethical complaint against him with the state medical licensing board. But the fact that the echo results he obtained differed from those obtained at a later date doesn't mean he was lying about his results, and it would be very wrong for you to file a complaint about him simply based on that.

If you found 5 lawyers with some interest in taking your case, call one and make an appointment.

1 Reply

@luismtzzz,

"I really doubt that you will able to build a case. As Firelfly noticed the cardiologist made everything under normal procedure. I shall complement with the technical aspects of your tests."

He made everything under normal procedure but lied about the results of the procedures.

"EKG is a completely interpretative study. It can not stnad alone as a diagnosis test for an appropiate evaluation. It depends completely on the clinical experience of the doctor. The dignosis is done in conjuction with the physical exploration and clinical history. Many graduate doctors have huge problems reading EKG correctly. And many of them commit a bigger mistake, some EKG machines provide an electronic interpretation made by the machine. This is stupid, as i said before EKG is useless without the clinical evaluation (i once saw a 17 year old girl a high performance athlete with a perfect health to whom a EKG machine reported old heart infarction, ventricular hypertrophy and new heart infarction).
What must doctors do is refer the patient to an specialist that has more experience with EKG, of course with a note on what is their fear.
The more EKG experienced specialists are Cardiologists, Internal medicine doctors, and Emergency specialists."

It was the hospitals experienced Cardiologist who reviewed my EKG and said it was enlarged and sent it off to my pediatrician. I read that fatigue is a symptom of enlargement and that is exactly what I was having. Do all left atrial enlargements cause symptoms? Also, I did start suffering from palpitations as I mentioned in one of the "Pertinent Events", which have continued to this day but now are rare. Also I mentioned the unusual episodes of chest pains about 2 months after.

"This questions are of upmost importance, they help evaluate if there really is a cardiac problem."

Yep. I had chest pain not caused by food. I then started having palpitations and severe chest pain completely unrelated to food, as well. Unfortunately, I was lied to about those by the hospital this lying doctor is affiliated with so I can't prove anything. They will just say it was strain from something (sureeeeeeeeeee). But anyway, now I sometimes get left sided chest pain that a 2013 cardiologist wanted evaluated for possible ischemia but I have not followed through with this.

"After performing his questions and making a phisical exploration he noticed that the EKG findings where irrelevant. Even more important, for the evaluation of a murmur the EKG is useless. The phrase the EKG was beutiful is a smooth way to try and make you relax. Of course he saw it. But didn´t found relation to your complaints. BTW the clinical formula to evaluate the size of the left ventricle has a rate of false positives that goes up to 40 per cent. It means 4 in 10 patients diagnosed as left side enlargment by EKG alone will have a completely normal left side of the heart."

First of all, I'm sure this lying sack of @$%$ heard my prolapse and as you may know, that's one of the causes for an enlargement. And guess what else? Around the time of left enlargement on EKG I had total left sided dull pain that, from what I can remember was from waist to armpit and covered some of back and the front of left side of body. I've only had this thing 1 time in my life and it was at that time when I had the EKG. Just because I didn't pass out, have flutters, dizziness or chest pain during activity doesn't mean my VERY unique chest pain at the time of EKG is insignificant. Maybe it was a coincidence that I got enlargement at that time and then later my enlargement disappeared as even the honest cardiologist has echocardiogram and EKG that do not show any enlargement except for a 49MM diastolic pressure and above normal is 52 for my age back then.

"This are normal findings on a young patient with functional murmur. But even if there is no murmur many factors can alter the EKG findings, like some medical drugs, hormone alterations, food (coke, black tea, chocolate, rye), emotional factors (anxiety, stress), hydration state. At the end they recommend an echo follow up. which actually was reported as normal.
If you saw a pediatrician it means you where less than 16 years old. During the teen years the body mas,s muscle mass and longitudinal growth change drastically and greatedly, so the heart rapidly has to adapt to the new physical demands. So quick physiological and hemodinamical changes are completely common."

This is nullified by the fact that I was 19 and turning 20 very soon.

Keep trying buddy.

"Go and ask an experienced lawyer. I really doubt that you will win such case."

You're right, but only because lawyers are big pussies and/or lazy and don't want to waste time with something that won't make them big money. And from what I heard elsewhere, I won't even make any money if I win because my injuries are mental and not physical as I don't have any evidence his lies caused me "increase in damage." So lame.

1 Reply

@firefly,

"That's true--for a malpractice suit you must be able to show you were injured by either a doctor's actions or his failures to act. The suit is seeking monetary compensation for those injuries. Without evidence of injuries directly related to the doctor's negligence (departure from acceptable standards of care), you have no basis for a damage suit."

And this is what I find very sad. I should be compensated for my mental sufferings as I am sensitive person and took them more than other people might have. And I was lied about my heart, one of the most important organs in the body... so how does this not immediately entitle me to money?

"You are assuming that all echocardiograms of the same person should yield the same results. That is not always the case. There are different types of echoes, the visualization of the heart may differ, the image quality may differ, the conditions of testing may differ, interpretations may differ--test results can vary for all sorts of reasons, and the test can yield both false positive results and false negative results, and when discrepant results are obtained, you simply do additional testing until results are consistent or the reason for the discrepancy is clarified. After the echo you had at the hospital, they did recommend another echo. Your cardiologist found the echo he had done to be normal, there was no reason for him to do further testing."

It shouldn't yield no results when there's at least a grade 3 harsh murmur. And like I've been saying, the best way to solve this is get a doctor to review the audio and video of the original echo and the stress echo and get this doctor owned for lying with no way whatsoever around it. A completely imcompetense that deserves a revoked license or a ban from practicing cardiology. If this guy is messing up this bad and/or lying to people as we speak, well, that's just crazy. All those innocent people told their hearts are normal when in fact they caught flapping valves and !@#$#

The insanity.

"Proving he lied won't make you any money--unless the lie, regarding diagnosis or treatment caused you to directly suffer an actual injury. But, if you feel he lied about your test results, and maliciously told you something other than what the echo result actually indicated, you could file an ethical complaint against him with the state medical licensing board. But the fact that the echo results he obtained differed from those obtained at a later date doesn't mean he was lying about his results, and it would be very wrong for you to file a complaint about him simply based on that.
If you found 5 lawyers with some interest in taking your case, call one and make an appointment."

I am not filing any complaint with a board that actually issued this liar a license to practice lies. Not wasting my time on anything except where I'd get money out of it, really.

0 Replies

@disabled1,

Quote:

lawyers are big pussies and/or lazy and don't want to waste time with something that won't make them big money

Lawyers who handle malpractice cases work on consignment--their payment is a percentage of any award given to you. If you win nothing, they receive nothing for the time and effort they have put into your case.

They, quite understandably, don't want to take any case they don't feel they have a shot at winning. It's not that they want to win "big money" it's more that they don't want to waste their time on a case not likely to get them any money. And that's why 45 of the 50 lawyers you called showed no interest in your "case". They are in a better position to evaluate the merits of your case, even in a quick phone conversation, than you are.

Quote:

Not wasting my time on anything except where I'd get money out of it. I am broke.

I suggest you try another way of getting some money. Buy a lottery ticket.

Be happy you appear to have nothing seriously wrong with your heart. Be happy you weren't actually injured by a doctor's negligence.

1 Reply

@firefly,

"They, quite understandably, don't want to take any case they don't feel they have a shot at winning."

Well a lot have said that if there's no physical then they don't want me. A few said I don't even have a case because I guess now the mental is such a puny problem that it's not even worth anything. Never mind that I had a 20,000 hospital bill for my mental hospitalization.

Nice.

Edit: Okay, you're right. I just remembered they said proving mental is VERY hard or something. Makes sense.

Yeah I would much rather have a non-serious issue with my heart than have a serious one and be told this same stuff. Lol.

1 Reply

@disabled1,

Quote:

Never mind that I had a 20,000 hospital bill for my mental hospitalization.

How did the cardiologist directly cause that?

1 Reply

I would almost bet that the 5 of 50 lawyers who were somewhat willing to take the case would not be doing it on a contingency basis.

0 Replies

@firefly,

Uh, I was unstable because I had suicidal ideation because I wanted to make a big video chat room and show everyone evidence and then suicide. I was also having persecutory thoughts that were quite real when you never know what the hell is true or not and if you have a tumor or not or if the blood work is really fine or not or if you have ventricular hypertension now and I'd experience chest pain when sitting up or standing up. Not knowing who to talk to about my problems because they might kill me and try to poison me with medicine...

Anything else I didn't mention?

1 Reply

@tsarstepan,

tsarstepan wrote:

Quote:
D. THIS SERVICE DOES NOT PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL LEGAL ADVICE. All of the services' content, including postings, is for informational purposes only. The service is not intended to be a substitute for professional legal advice, and no attorney/client privilege is to be inferred from any postings herein. Always seek the advice of a qualified legal professional with questions you have regarding a legal matter. You should not disregard professional legal advice because of something you have received from or read in the able2know service.

http://able2know.org/about/tos/

I would like to repeat this. This site does NOT give out legal (or medical) advice. It is against our Terms of Service for a reason. This is to protect the asker of the question and any answerers, no matter how well-meaning.

Information about whether someone has a case is a part of the practice of law and the giving of legal advice. Legal advice includes information on whether alleged proof is admissible as evidence, and what the odds are of winning a matter.

To the original poster - contact your local Bar Association and ask for a list of attorneys who are versed in taking medical malpractice cases on the plaintiff side, on a contingency basis. Be prepared for that to be a short list, and be prepared to potentially be told that no one is interested in taking your case. That is the reality of the world; lawyers do not have to take on every case presented, and they refuse to represent for any number of reasons.

But your questions need to be presented to a lawyer admitted to practice in your jurisdiction, and not on an Internet message board.

Thank you.

1 Reply

@disabled1,

I think that the cardiac evaluation just fueled up a mental problem you already have. Plus you really look that your only interest is diggin up some money.

You are just victimizing yourself. You promplty jump into the decision of killing yourself when multiple test (not only the echo) proved that there was nothing wrong on your heart. A normal reaction of a coherent and logically driven person would had been seeking for a second opinion. But what you did:

<inmediatedly assumed that every doctor will lie to you,
<started beliving that your cardiologist wanted to kill you,
<then wanted to make a video chat to share your delusional evidence,
<then suicide,
<and now sue the doctors,
<90 per cents of the lawyers rejected your case and now you call them cowards.

Even if the first echo revealed a few alterations. They are not lifethreatening, and the common procedure is just regular echo follow up. No one has a perfect heart, we are imperfect organic creatures. More than 50 per cent of population had some kind of cardiac alteration on a echocardiogram. The important part of the results is whether those lesions cause an alteration of your life quality or not.

With all you have told by now i guess that your chest pain could be more emotionaly or pshycologicaly caused.

Good luck with this plan you have.

1 Reply

@luismtzzz,

I assumed the cardiologists were one of the most important and authoritative doctors and if they lie there's no one who would argue against. I was right, until I went to a hospital that wasn't scared of liars (I tried several and was treated rudely and shooed out like an animal).

Screw doctors that lie and screw you for defending them. You have some interesting stuff but in the end, your ultimate goal is to defend a liar which makes you a sack of #$% liar, too.

Have a nice day.

1 Reply

@disabled1,

Why on earth would a doctor lie if he knew you had an even somewhat condition? Just for the fun of it?

2 Replies

@jespah,

jespah, in reality, posters at A2K dispense both medical and legal advice all the time, some of them may actually be physicians or lawyers, but most are likely not. People simply like to give advice and people come here all the time seeking advice about one thing or another. The name of the site is also "Ask an Expert", which makes the matter even more confusing.

People give other people advice all the time--that doesn't mean they are giving professional opinions, particularly when they aren't actually professionals in an area, or that, even when they are, that they are entering into a professional relationship with the poster if they offer general advice.

The terms of service are primarily to protect the site from liability and posters from advice which might be questionable or incorrect. They serve as a warning to people who come here that the advice they receive is not intended to be a substitute for professional opinion specific to their situation.

Quote:

The service is not intended to be a substitute for professional legal advice, and no attorney/client privilege is to be inferred from any postings herein.

I don't really think you can stop people from offering advice--whether it's general legal or general medical advice, or advice on how to treat diarrhea in your dog, or advice on how to stop a leak in your sink--as long as it's offered as personal, not professional, opinion, and as long as it's offered simply for informational purposes and not intended to be taken as a substitute for professional opinion. No one should ever take the statement of an anonymous poster on a site like this one as a substitute for the professional opinion of someone whose name and credentials are known and can be validated.

Quote:

This site does NOT give out legal (or medical) advice.

That's not what the Terms of Service say. The TOS say only that what's posted here is not offered as professional opinion.

If you want to stop all posters from offering any medical or legal advice, or advice on pet medical/ health care I'm not sure that's enforceable. If someone suggests taking Tylenol for a headache, is that medical advice? If someone posts the legal definition of malpractice in a particular state--as I did in this thread--is that legal advice? If one poster suggests another poster call CPS, is that legal advice?

This recent thread is an example of medical advice being offered to a poster
http://able2know.org/topic/250265-1

And many threads like that pop up all the time, along with threads seeking legal advice. People come here looking for advice and other posters respond.

The opening poster in this thread was not given any professional legal advice specific to his inquiry--he was given personal opinion, including the opinion that he should actually contact an attorney on the matter.

How is one poster simply offering another poster any type of advice, or opinion, on any subject, in violation of the Terms of Service?

1 Reply

@roger,

Go and ask him.... that's the only way you'll find out I believe.

1 Reply

Can I sue my cardiologist for this?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know