Last week Doctor D answered this question in a way that made him sound like a frickin' hero:
How do doctors deal with colleagues that they know are incompetent?
Now that you all think I'm awesome, I have to make a confession: I have looked the other way a lot more often than I have saved the day.
Doctor D has known some bad doctors over the years. I don't mean doctors that make errors—we all do that sometimes—but doctors that flagrantly disregard patient safety and don't give a damn about right practice. And Doctor D usually kept his mouth shut.
The code of silence started early...
Doctor D's first run-in with reckless care was as a first year med student. D was working with Dr. Subethical who happened to teach the medical ethics class. Dr. Subethical who seemed so cool in class spent most of his clinic time screaming at patients and dictating physical exams he didn't perform. Lowly Medical Student D thought that this didn't seem right, but he never confronted Dr. Subethical or filed any complaint. Young D figured he must have just misunderstood the situation. Also Dr. Subethical was an honored professor while D was just some lowly student who didn't want a target on his back.
MD's usually have more power and more knowledge than their patients and other healthcare providers. This often keeps patients, med students, and nurses from confronting doctors. So it falls on other doctors to keep an eye out for bad care among our colleagues.
Unfortunately, we doctors do a terrible job policing each other.
Young D always kept his mouth shut in medical school, but he told himself that when he got that MD with some power and knowledge he would set the world right. He would stamp out crappy care and save the world from low-life doctards! Yeah, well old habits stuck around. D's been out of medical school for a long time now, and has seen quite a few doctards, and his number of confrontations thus far is a grand total of... one! To be honest, Doctor D only whooped some doctard ass at Crayzee Clinic after having incompetent care shoved in his face month after month till he couldn't ignore it anymore.
So in this anonymous blog Doctor D confesses:
"But wait, I can explain!"
There are lots of reasons good doctors are always letting the bad ones off the hook:
Doctor D has known some bad doctors over the years. I don't mean doctors that make errors—we all do that sometimes—but doctors that flagrantly disregard patient safety and don't give a damn about right practice. And Doctor D usually kept his mouth shut.The code of silence started early...
Doctor D's first run-in with reckless care was as a first year med student. D was working with Dr. Subethical who happened to teach the medical ethics class. Dr. Subethical who seemed so cool in class spent most of his clinic time screaming at patients and dictating physical exams he didn't perform. Lowly Medical Student D thought that this didn't seem right, but he never confronted Dr. Subethical or filed any complaint. Young D figured he must have just misunderstood the situation. Also Dr. Subethical was an honored professor while D was just some lowly student who didn't want a target on his back.
MD's usually have more power and more knowledge than their patients and other healthcare providers. This often keeps patients, med students, and nurses from confronting doctors. So it falls on other doctors to keep an eye out for bad care among our colleagues.
Unfortunately, we doctors do a terrible job policing each other.
Young D always kept his mouth shut in medical school, but he told himself that when he got that MD with some power and knowledge he would set the world right. He would stamp out crappy care and save the world from low-life doctards! Yeah, well old habits stuck around. D's been out of medical school for a long time now, and has seen quite a few doctards, and his number of confrontations thus far is a grand total of... one! To be honest, Doctor D only whooped some doctard ass at Crayzee Clinic after having incompetent care shoved in his face month after month till he couldn't ignore it anymore.
So in this anonymous blog Doctor D confesses:
"Hi I'm D, and I have turn a blind eye to bad medical care."Doctor D's readers all gasp and shake their heads.
"But wait, I can explain!"
There are lots of reasons good doctors are always letting the bad ones off the hook:
Nobody Likes Tattletales: You might assume that Doctor D's heroic battle with Crayzee Colleague looks good on his resume. Nope! D has a big FAIL stamped right across his forehead. Nobody wants to work with a goody two-shoes who rats out his buddies when they break the rules. Even the excellent docs got kinda distant while I was fighting Crayzee Colleague. If I called out bad doctors wherever I worked before long I wouldn't have a job.
- Nobody's Perfect: Our culture expects perfection from doctors. Of course, we all make mistakes, and many of us live in dread of errors. We want people to forgive our mistakes so we are willing to accept that other docs make errors too. Now there's a big difference between understandable human error and the doctard who makes a habit of flagrantly and willfully doing stupid shit. Unfortunately, this unspoken "culture of forgiveness" in medicine protects the guilty as well as the innocent
- Everybody Hates Lawyers: Every MD lives in constant fear of a malpractice case, which is a professional and personal catastrophe. We usually keep our mouths shut about bad care because discussing possible malpractice is taboo. If you accuse a colleague of malpractice you might as well send the poor schmuck in front of a firing squad. There just isn't any safe environment where we can confront other physicians. It's ether shut your mouth or throw your colleague to the dogs.
- There's More Than One Way To Skin A Cat: Every doc remembers that abusive attending in medical school that yelled that there was only one right way do do medicine, which happened to be his way. Later we learned there are a lot of different right answers in medicine. Every doc has a different treatment style. Nobody wants to grow up to be that jerk that attacked others' legitimate care because it wasn't the way he did it. So sometimes when we see obviously bad care we shrug and say, "Well that's not what I would do, but maybe it's just a different approach?"
- Second Hand Information: Most of the bad care I know about is hearsay. I usually don't have time to sit around and watch my colleagues practice. I hear things from patients or read charts that sound concerning, but I wasn't there. I tend to give other doctors the benefit of the doubt: "Maybe there's a good explanation for this?"
- We Expect Lawyers To Do Our Dirty Work: Every good doctor can probably think of an incompetent doctard who they secretly hope will get destroyed in a malpractice lawsuit. (Yep, Doctor D is thinking of one right now.) Malpractice is horrible, but some doctors deserve it. Why should we waste our time confronting bad care when lawyers will take out the garbage for us? Unfortunately, this is a total cop out. Malpractice does a terrible job policing medicine. First of all, the lawyers and juries don't understand medical care very well. Second, lawyers don't bring malpractice cases to improve medical care. Lawyers bring malpractice cases to hit the jackpot. The malpractice system creates a mad scramble where big money gets awarded or denied based on the lawyer's cleverness or the jury's mood, rather than the doctor's competence. Good doctors are often screwed while bad doctors get off on legal technicalities. Malpractice doesn't really improve medical care—it just makes doctors afraid to discuss bad care.
Of course, all these are just lame excuses. Doctors should step up and call out the bad ones who are endangering patients. Doctor D can think of a couple that need to be set straight, but after his adventure at Crayzee Clinic he isn't too eager to try any more heroics. He's keeping his mouth shut and venting anonymously on his blog.
So Doctor D has taken the first step: he admitted he has a problem. Any ideas for 11 more steps that could motivate D and the other good doctors out there to remove the incompetent doctors from their midst? I've got no answers on this one.
This is an intervention!
Your favorite blogging doctor has a serious apathy problem, but he is totally unmotivated to change. Use the comments section below to convince Doctor D why he try to be a hero again when the first time was a big fail!
33 comments:
Firstly you shouldn't be given a hard time. There is a sea of difference between Dr Perry Cox(scrubs) and Patch Adams for a reason.
It boils down to personalities.
After reading your various blog posts you appear to be a fairly good soul(nope not sucking up)because you are writing about things that matter to many, not just ranting about how crap all we patients are in general.
I see people as people not a profession.
I don't care what label a person has its them as people that truly matter to me.
I don't feel good, or like the stance I have had to take over my own case and didn't put in a complaint until I stumbled across patient after patient who has suffered worse if not as much as I under the care of Dr McTotalnastyincompetant.
In general you kinda, sorta, understand the the average joe blog's who stuff up in life, as they are average idiots.
However there is a difference when you enter an establishment which is sworn to do no harm, you hand over your body, soul and psychological well being and have trust in for the odd Dr McTotalnastyincompetant leaves you feeling forever fearful.
No one is perfect, everyone makes mistakes, you cant take on a whole system and expect to win.
There is a difference between dangerous and useless.
Thanks Neo (Can I still call you that or should we only use MedicalBooBoos now?)
I'm pretty sure at this stage in my career that I'm a good doctor. Not perfect, but definitely good. But it's doctors like your Dr. McTotalnastyincompetant that have me worried. What if the only reason that doc was able to hurt you was because good, competent, caring docs knew about him and looked the other way? What if the doctards that I fail to confront today end up permanently harming a nice person like you?
Questions like this keep me up at night, but they haven't yet prodded me to change my behavior. I'm like that smoker who's always worrying about lung cancer but won't quit the tobacco. I know I should do the right thing for patients sake, but confronting doctards in high places just feels like too much of a risk right now.
I'm not sure being a "good doctor" is enough when the good docs allow bad doctors wreck havoc on innocent patients.
By the way, Dr. Patch Adams and Dr. Perry Cox are very different but I would say they are both "good doctors."
Aside from the obvious that one is fictional and the other a real person, the main difference is in their personalities. Dr. Cox on Scrubs is the classic "Jerk Doctor" stereotype. I'm sure that would make him difficult to work with, but his character (in the shows I've seen) actually cares about patients' well-being and doing medicine right.
The Doctards I'm talking about have deficiencies of professional character--not just personality.
Awesome post. Tattletales. Will remember that.
May I just say, I love Doctor Spaceman.
(Very constructive, I know.)
It doesn't sound like there's a problem with doctors recognizing when a colleague might be a problem. The conundrum is what to do about it.
Although it doesn't make things easier, you're not exactly alone. It's a problem in other occupations, too: the policeman who notices corruption can lose his job and have trouble getting another one if he blows the whistle, the nuclear plant worker who gets fired for speaking up about safety violations, the teacher who expects colleagues to teach students, the farmer who recognizes mad cow disease and knows that everyone for miles around will lose their livelihood if the news isn't kept quiet...
There needs to be a way for good doctors to identify the bad -- for the sake of patients everywhere. Patients can verify that someone who claims to be a doctor really did graduate from medical school. We can check the ABMS website to verify board certification. Unfortunately, those things don't guarantee competence.
Speaking up is important. Who to say something to, and how? There are some pretty interesting studies on the impact of gender differences in communication. Men tend to be more confrontational, and that could be detrimental in this type of situation. There's a distinction between (a) accusing someone of doing a bad job, or (b) coming alongside to offer support as they strive for improvement. People have a tendency to turn into porcupines when they're on the receiving end of accusations, and usually respond better to a show of empathy. Phrases like, "Is there a reason you..." and "It must be hard __ when __..." and "I noticed ___; is there anything I can do to help?" soften the ego blow when constructive criticism is delivered. Less helpful might be to hand the person a package of M&M candies every day ;)
Here's a post I read recently that indicates it's sometimes possible to address the issue directly. Or indirectly, you could go to sites such as vitals, ratemds, and RevolutionHealth (all dotcoms) to post warnings online. Given enough bad feedback, people might avoid those doctors.
What's the cost-benefit ratio to speaking up? By keeping quiet, how many people are seriously harmed? If you get the reputation of a troublemaker by speaking up, thus end up unemployable, that's a pretty steep cost - both to you personally, and also to all those who lose out on the care you'd no longer be providing. If you stay quiet and continue to provide good medical care, are you helping more people than are being hurt by the bad doctors? I could argue this both ways. Don't you hate it when there's no good solution?
Wow, that was a longer comment than I intended. Sorry about that.
Um . . . dumb question . . . doesn't the patient bear a significant responsibility in this? I mean, I think it is my job to know what is generally going on, to get second opinions, do research, follow my gut . . .
Am I a rarity in thinking this way?
- Marie (Coming Out of the Trees)
We have to deal with this in the veterinary world at an alarming rate. I do primarily emergency work and see the F-ups of all sorts of vets. Only a few of these are genuine mistakes, most are docs that are practicing medicine from their graduation year. We have people that insist that animals don't feel pain. We have people that insist that you don't have to be sterile to perform abdominal surgery (that tale was from the MD I was seeing for an injury: his vet let him assist, bare handed, in his own dog's neuter). We have people that give steroids for EVERYTHING, including as "pain meds" for dogs that have polytrauma including open fractures.
I have called a spade a spade on several occasions, advising people to complain to the board of vet med. But, since many of the f-ups are done by shareholders in clinics were I have worked, I generally have to keep my mouth shut if I want to work in this city.
I guess this problem flourishes in all professions but takes on a whole new dimension when actual lives are involved. Whistle blowers are given the hero treatment once they make it on the news but I can see how difficult it must be to feel that you are going against all of your colleagues and doubting your own decisions at times. No one really says what kind of obstacles you face when trying out substandard practice.
Dr D,
I know you're trying to express your contempt for doctors who don't do medicine justice. But that "tard" ending you're using comes from retard and that in stating what's wrong with parts of the profession, you're insulting people with developmental disabilities. I'm sure you see some as you patients and would hope that you would see the difference between them and your inept and sometimes even uncaring colleagues.
And for what it's worth, my profession - lawyers - aren't all in it for the big bucks. If you think that, you've never faced a suit from someone like Community Legal Services (CLS) or similar organizations. Some of us go into the profession because there are areas like this where the law can be the only thing a person can use to protect themselves. Just like people are worth healing, people are worth protecting. (I won't pretend it's most of us, or that the majority of malpractice lawyers fall into this category, or that the division of fees and damages makes any kind of sense - I just prefer not to be tarred with the same brush, thanks)
Having said that...it seems to me that given the results of officially pursuing bad doctors on your career, if I were in your shoes, I'd start wondering about unofficially doing it. I don't know what kinds of methods of dealing with things are available.
To be frank, I didn't go into medicine because I knew it would break my heart and soul to watch my patients suffer because their health insurance wouldn't pay for the treatment I thought would help them. It takes more courage than I have to fight that particular fight; I can at least go into court and fight tooth and nail for something like justice.
~Kali
Thanks for all the great comments I'm coming around... I hope.
Marie, while patients do have some responsibility I don't think they usually have enough knowledge to be able to most spot bad care. Patients shouldn't be required to search the internet to catch bad doctors, they should search the internet for their own education. Nor do I think poorer less educated patients who have less ability to find reliable info online should get poor care.
Kali, I'm sorry if I seemed to imply that all malpractice lawyers are in it for money. I'm sure there are notable exceptions, but I would still say that the overall effect of the malpractice on the number of bad doctors is quite neglegable.
By the way "doctards" has nothing to do with disabled people. Adding -tard to the end of a word to imply idiotic behavior in people who should know better has been around the blogsphere as long as I can remember. I don't think anyone still uses the word "retard" for disabled people any more. If so I shouldn't use the word idiotic either because it was once a medical term for disabled people. Words change meaning over time.
Just a probably useless aside...i loved Robin Williams' portrayal of "Patch Adams", however, i know a resident (now Fellow) who had the opportunity to meet the "real" Adams and he was...rather dissapointed, to put it lightly. Sad.
The diagnosis of 'mental retardation' is still used. And the insult of 'retard' is still slung around quite handily, and meant to imply someone who has developmental disabilities, not just 'someone who should know better'.
It's ableist language, Dr. D. It does indeed have to do with disabled people. I'd suggest you read http://disabledfeminists.com/2009/11/23/o-language-again/ and http://disabledfeminists.com/2009/10/16/ableist-word-profile-retarded/ and http://kateharding.net/2008/05/01/why-i-dont-use-the-word-retarded/
As for malpractice suits affecting the number of bad doctors practicing, you're absolutely right - the process can't touch enough of them. A big part of that is that most people who have recieved sub-standard care don't know that. No one tells them. Unless something truely horrific happened, few of them end up even trying to find out if they can do anything about how they were treated - which is a damn shame. I think part of the answer to that is having doctors more willing to say to the patients whose care they 'fix', "I think you should file a complaint or talk to a lawyer." I know that goes entirely against the grain, but if no one tells patients that they have been wronged and they have recourse, nothing will happen.
~Kali
Hi Dr D, call me Neo:), that was a mistake when I wrote my other blog and put in a new name for it, not realizing that it would be used on both of my blogs, even though I wanted them completely separate, sigh! Sometimes I have truly blond moments.
I confer on the Cox versus Patch. I actually like Dr Cox because he is good. I have always believed even if a Dr has a very bad bedside manner if he is great at his job he/she is a great Dr. I would prefer that over a nice Dr who knows squat.
However mix a good personality with good practice and you have Dr Mc supremie.
In my personal case the Dr is deficient in both area's, which is sad.
What is frightening in this case is the group of Docs in the specialty are the only ones who cover a large area in my Island.
They are in private and public practice together. They have shares in the private business. So I have no autonomy on a second opinion outside the realms of the group.
From what a Registrar told me a couple of years back "we had a meeting on the Monday and all knew you had a bowel obstruction" does make me squirm to think not one of them had the power to intervene and relieve my suffering. Although Im sure something was said to Dr Mc Totalnastyincompetant, as the surgery was done.
I have no issue with Doctard think its funny, I'm sorry I live in an overly P.C country which is sucking the funny out of everything.
We have to laugh at ourselves, see the funny in things and stop being so sensitive.
Some things I abhore that are really defamatory to patients, but hey we gotta laugh sometimes, don't we?
I absolutely cracked up, until I cried when a nurse joked with me one night many moons ago saying "you better hurry up and donate your kidney's while you can, after what Dr Mc Totallynastyincompetent did" They said other things also, you had to be there, but there was no offense, I was laughing at my own misfortune, sometimes we have to.
I remember during a PhD interview with Dr. NastyProf (who was NOT an MD), she absolutely grilled me on whether I would hypothetically turn in an anesthesiology attending if I observed them to be intoxicated.
I said no. Apparently this was the wrong answer.
I maintain my answer would be no today unless I could somehow file an anonymous complaint and never have to hear about it again. They recently instituted such a system at my med school's hospital.
This stuff just follows you around, and often seems to get turned against the messenger in the end. You don't want to be blackballed during residency interviews because you've been labeled a "tattletale" and have YOUR OWN life ruined for trying to do the right thing, after all.
I once witnessed an anesthesiologist a LONG time ago "sampling" ethrane (inhalational agent) to "test" the breathing circuit. This was while I was a student. I thought it terribly unusual, mentioned it to another attending, but didn't pursue it any further. I was put off at the time, being told simply that he was an "odd duck", and did things a bit differently.
Fortunately, I found out that several years later he was forced into retirement by his colleagues (unfortunately, it took a number of years). I never heard of any bad outcomes by him, but have always regretted not pursuing it more forcefully at the time. I do think it is hard to pursue such things when there is a big power discrepancy, and no method to protect the one in the inferior position.
I am now an attending at a major medical school as an anesthesiologist. We take any hint of such problems VERY seriously, and accept tips from medical and non-medical staff. We recently had a resident that "experimented" with an IV drug while off duty. He was promptly sent to rehab, counseled for several months, and allowed back under close supervision. He was observed to have personality problems after his return, though he did not test positive for any drugs. After again being counseled and not improving in his relations with others, he was dropped from the program and reported to the medical board. I felt bad about his career being ruined, but did feel that he had gotten a chance to turn himself around, and blew it.
Just Another Joe
If you look the other way YOU are responsible for the pain and suffering caused by these incompetent "doctors". My life was ruined by one such doctor and had someone spoken up I might have a normal and healthy life. You are pathetic and your excuses shameful. I hope one day you are on the receiving end of one of these incompetents you decided to keep quiet about.
All of you who said you would not report such as "Old MD Girl" are disgusting. You allow these idiots to harm patients because you are "afraid" of "getting in trouble".
You have no business treating patients if this is your attitude. Shame on you.
October 7th Anonymous:
Take a deep breath!
Explaining why bad things exist isn't the same as excusing or condoning them. Can you honestly say that EVERY time you have ever seen a wrong you have worked to correct it? Even if it meant "getting in trouble?"
Do you fight incompetence, injustice, racism, sexism, poverty, corruption, and violence every time you see it? It's easy to sit back in your arm chair and be opposed to bad things. It's a lot more complicated to get your hands dirty in the trenches fighting the bad things.
As I mentioned in the previous post I lost a job and screwed up my resume trying to stop and incompetent doc. Making the world a better place is a lot harder when you actually try to do it. Should I do more? Yes. Thank you for pointing that out so rudely.
I'm sure though, Anonymous, you are staying busy volunteering in homeless shelters, feeding the hungry, fostering abandoned kids, protesting abortion, fighting government corruption, putting your own fearless body in front of tanks to stop wars! I suppose if you do all these things then you really are a better person and have a right to look down on my moral failings.
If you aren't living that way then I suggest you get off your moral high horse and mix a little kindness with your sense of superiority!
I've known very few true humanitarians in my life that do all those things, and you know what? They are all much more forgiving of human error than you are.
Sound like a doctor hurt you. Sorry! Life was bad to you. It is bad for a lot of people.
Perhaps you should stop leaving bitter comments on blogs and go out and do some good for some people. Help some people who have it worse than you and maybe you can get over you own indignation enough to practice forgiveness!
That was a bit harsh, wasn't it?
Nope, not a bit harsh. Straightforward, impassioned, and honest, yes. Harsh, no.
Dr D
Harsh? Maybe.
So what.
We are who we are and we do what we do. You at least are more honest than most about your limitations.
I've just discovered your wonderful blog. Hope I'm not too late with this thread. I'm on the patient end with a disease that has me in and out of hospitals the past 6 years (2 surgeries so far). I want to continue having faith in the 2 doctors that have been caring for me, but am reluctant to ask this question of them. As we can be anonymous here, it's easy now to be candid.
If one of your patients asked your opinion of another doctor whom you know to be incompentent or dangerous, and this doctor was a colleague in your practice or hospital, what would you tell your patient?
Thanks,
Amanda from Calif.
I would like to suggest that what is needed to prevent incompetent, or disinterested doctors from harming patients is some form of random review process. Perhaps a continuing randomly selected collegial review by docs who are not in a position to directly benefit from or suffer the consequences of giving an honest professional review of a colleges performance.
I can assure you that waiting on the lawyers to do that "dirty work" is a non starter. Proving negligence (or worse yet malpractice) is almost impossible in the majority of cases; and in the end it just enriches the legal beast we have created in America, but it is by no means a solution. Perhaps all doctors could agree to participate in reviews of patient care via a remote review process where they are given patient information, physician notes and data on patient satisfaction surveys and medical outcomes from a representative sampling of a given doctors patients and then be asked to make an anonymous appraisal of the care given and the outcomes achieved. A threshold could then be set where, when doctor receives a certain number of substandard evaluations from his peer group, a preceptor, in the form a state licensed medical practitioner that specializes in the same field, could be assigned to monitor the doctor in question much more closely and to determine the validity of the poor collegial performance reviews and offer suggestions, solutions or were needed implement sanctions to improve quality of care and patient outcomes.
I know one thing, the number of doctors who make grave errors in their practice seems to run a pretty steady rate since I was in nursing school over 15 years ago, I see it infrequently, but regularly, and it shows no real sign of abating. If anything, it has increased slightly since the economic downturn. The number one situation where I see doctors blatant screwing up seems to be when they are highly stressed, over worked, or grandiose toward their patients and the staff (sorry but its true!). One thing for sure, something needs to be done!
Ombudsman says to the doctor, you don't have the authorization to stop the patient from going on passes. Doctor tells Ombudsman, maybe you should go to other nursing homes and give seminar, I'm sure that they don't know of this either. Patient cries because of becoming a prisoner and Doctor says that he cares for the patients' Mental Health. Doctor still does't know how to keep his mouth shut. Doctor doesn't want to be human ( I didn't make any errors ).
One thing I have not heard anyone mention in this debate about reporting suspected incompetence is the increasing specialization of medicine and the feeling that not specializing in the same field renders one incapable of making a good retrospective judgement.
I agree that malpractice suits do very little to protect patients. Not only are they expensive to initiate, but severe time limits, length of time to judgement, as well as societal trends towards leniency in doctors behaviors render many valid suits (and the resultant reports to the NPDB) unattainable.
In my case, I was badly injured by an orthopedic surgery. It took 3 years, 5 doctors, and 2 unnecessary surgeries to receive adequate disclosure. Getting the problem fixed required traveling out-of-state, a week long hospital stay, 2 months in a wheelchair, and a year of recovery -- not to mention a good percentage of my income for that year paying out-of-pocket to fix the mistake. Believe me, a person who is badly injured generally cannot meet the malpractice deadline of most states.
What disgusted me most about this situation, was the vacant stares that I would receive from doctors and radiologists, when I requested more information about what was going on. It is unconscionable how many people knew, or strongly suspected, what was wrong but looked away when I was receiving "corrective surgeries" that offered no hope of fixing the underlying problem.
I have made several requests of a report, and am usually told that "since I do not specialize in this area, I am unable to render an opinion". I question whether this is a valid response to the endemic "failure to report" in my region. I wonder if the Joe Paterno and Jerry Sandusky issue that has received so much publicity -- will change a stick in the mud attitude of mandatory reporters in the US.
If you permit it...you promote it.
One of the hardest things in medicine indeed. I practice in a small town which also happens to be the town I did residency in. I know for a fact that the residents who are about to graduate have blood on their hands because of laziness, incompetence and straight out stupidity. It's a corrupt little residency program which lets incompetent people in on the basis of race, financial status and current relationship status (sexual or not) with the program director and his wife (which is a whole different story you might or might not want to hear about). I am dreadful that one of these doctards is going to end up working in my group and, as usual, I have to pick up the slack for their errors. One of them even dropped a baby! for god's sake on a delivery which ended up in the NICU, and she is still there! and will graduate!!!! How do you stand up to this load of corruption? where to start?
How could a so called "good doctor" not report an incompetent knowing people can be injured or killed? Kinda puts them all in the "bad doctor" category.
Hi Dr. D! Having all the symptoms of Menieres for the last yr and a half the radiologist read the mri and found metal in my inner auditory canal...My dr said it was in the external ear...whats wrong with this picture?????? What will happen to me? The dr. said he didnt know why I was dizzy. I think the metal is in the internal auditory canal where you get your balance but the dr.says it isnt. What will happen to me? I have a super bad memory so could you email me at charleneroray@yahoo.com as I cant remember websites i am on.
Hi Dr. D,
I feel lucky to be alive for my children. Long sorry short, I injured my spine from a fall 20 years ago. About a year or so ago, my doctor blew of my concerns for mobility in the cold. A few months later,I heard the tear, my body slung shoot left, the room, colors, everything swirled and I had a feeling of being held down by some gravitational pull. I couldn't lift up...needles to say, until I argued for an MRI after months of begging of an S shaped pain from my left lumbar around left hoo and front thigh...leg pain...numbness...stinging...and so on. At one point I complained that I was in Soooo much pain in my extremities, I could die. My heat best was apparently 75/36. One heartbeat from a coma. Dr. sent me home and my ten year old kept me alive, caring for me and the family. I was even near death from a sigmoidoscopy.... Which was done before my MRI, which reflected my entire left region was extremely inflamed with a large mass of scar tissue and lesions. I know I was left bleeding internally and this Dr. got away with everything.... She simply did not believe me, even accused me of causing my own pain, before testing me. I have suppressed anger that which is becoming dangerous. My life, my mobility will Nebr be the same because I was ignored.
Maybe a little bit of Dunning-Krueger effect is going on here... Perhaps Dr. D doesn't reprimand incompetent colleagues because he is no more competent than they are; afterall here he is calling people "tards" and his his inability to use apostrophes correctly is on full display...
Post a Comment