Better to be safe then sorry?
- Nurse sues for Malpractice:
> Holly is a nurse at Memorial Hospital. There is a familyHe didn't think it was cancer, but because of her history and her
> history of cancer and her mother recently passed away from cancer, so when
> she was advised that there was a suspicious area in a routine mammogram,
> was understandably concerned. She went to the surgeon who had treated her
> concerns, he recommended a biopsy. This was done at MemorialThe pathologist told the surgeon there was no cancer. This
> Hospital. The pathology report was positive for breast cancer.
> As a consequence, her surgeon recommended a lumpectomy with lymph node
> sampling as well as a biopsy of the other breast for which there had been
> similar mammographic findings. This time the surgeon took the tissue
> samples to the pathologist himself to have them immediately reviewed under
> the microscope.
prompted the surgeon to question the earlier biopsy. The earlier slide was
> examined again and this time the pathologist interpreted it as benign. HeUnfortunately, Holly had already been told that she had
> issued an amended pathology report to reflect that the original findings
> were benign.
> cancer and would likely need chemotherapy and radiation. She had alsoShe developed a hospital-bound infection which had to be treated
> undergone additional surgery. Although the cosmetic result has been good,
> she has additional scarring that she would not have had but for this
> surgery. She also continues to have diminished sensation under the arm and
> breast at the surgical site, as well as continued pain and periodic
> and which prolonged her recovery. She also has at least some risk ofAs a nurse she is > aware of the potential problem. As a consequence, she
> developing lymphedema at some point in her life as a result of the excision
> of the lymph nodes. This is a painful and disabling condition in which the
> arm can swell gruesomely. The risk is extremely slight in her case, but it
> can't be eliminated based on the medical literature.
> follows certain precautions that are recommended for persons at risk, suchAlso, for a very brief but harrowing period of time, she thought she > had
> as limiting her
> lifting, avoiding tight clothing or undue pressure or use of the affected
> dominant arm, and she knows to consult a physician immediately if she
> suffers any injury to the arm which can trigger lymphedema. She recently
> had an insect bite and that prompted a course of antibiotics because of
> cancer. Even though she has been assured that this is not true, she hasFinally, she is concerned > about her insurability should she have to fill
> continued anxieties over the mistake that was made. It has never been
> explained to her or her physician how this mistake occurred. For this
> reason, she has a small but unshakeable fear that the pathologist made a
> mistake interpreting both tissue samples or that her slide was confused
> someone elses tissue who has cancer and doesn't know it. Her trust has
> been shaken and even though she knows her fears have likely been addressed,
> it is something that she can't easily resolve.
> out an application for insurance in the future and is asked whether she hasShe is not sure how she can honestly answer that question and
> ever been diagnosed with cancer.
> whether it will produce problems getting coverage. Although it shouldn't,Now here is the interesting part.- both sides are looking to settle- the sole
> it may be something that she will be obligated to explain and hope that the
> explanation is accepted by anyone considering the risk of insuring her.
> Ofcourse, the defense will rightfully argue that the error was corrected as
> soon as it was possible to do so and that the damages are minimal.
issue is how much should Holly Sands receive for her pain, suffering,
what is her case worth?
thanks in advance..
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]