Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

mother delivers head. some comments

Expand Messages
  • Jurydoctor@aol.com
    My God, what a case! Unbelievable… Monetary damages should be assessed at $1,000,000 minimum from each of the primary physicians, Drs. Bank & Soto. As to the
    Message 1 of 1 , Jan 20, 2005
      My God, what a case! Unbelievable… Monetary damages should be
      assessed at $1,000,000 minimum from each of the primary physicians,
      Drs. Bank & Soto.

      As to the questions:

      1.) Plaintiff's prior history should not be a matter of
      prejudice here. (In fact, plaintiff's attorney could I think – and
      should – seek to include some specific sort of exclusionary language
      in the jury instruction.)

      2.) It's impossible to estimate the value sought here; not sure
      I can do that.

      3.) Is she entitled? As I read this, she is indeed.

      4.) Pain & Suffering is almost impossible to gauge here. The
      associated trauma – how do you fairly compensate someone for that?
      $1,000,000 is a beginning, but even that seems terribly low.






      ________________________________________________________________________
      ________________________________________________________________________

      Subject: Re: Mother delivers child's head




      > 1) What bias or prejudice will Nicole face for her abortions?
      >
      Totally depends upon the individual judging - there is no uniform stance

      > 2) What is the full monetary value of the life of a 19-20 week old
      > fetus?
      >
      Nothing. It is not a person, it is not of any monetary value (unless you
      count some kind of gruesome research).

      > 3) Is Nicole is entitled to recover money for her child's death?
      >
      Not for the death. There may be some criminal charge.

      > 4) Is she entitled to recover for her mental pain and suffering?
      >
      Probaby.
      > 5) What amount of money will fairly compensate her for the experience
      > after her child died where the doctor pulled the child apart, failed to
      > retrieve his head and sent her home to deliver her child's head in the
      > toilet?
      >
      Is it worth more because the head fell into the toilet as opposed to the car
      seat or bed or doctor's office? I don't think so. That's just 'freak' value
      for the pubic. She should be entitled to a year off and psychiatric help.

      p.s. most important fact. How did the test get misread as the opposite?

      p.p.s. how are other women going to find competent obstetricians?








      ________________________________________________________________________
      ________________________________________________________________________

      Subject: head delivered

      There will be discrimination because of the previous abortions just out of
      human nature but these should have no bearing on this specific and particular
      pregnancy.
      She was doing everything within her power to deliver a normal healthy baby.
      <<<<<Dr. Soto advised her the fetal
      fibronectin test was negative when in fact it was positive>>>
      If there is proof of this positive then it should be asked what is the normal
      routine to follow with a positive.
      I see this as a failure and the failure to examine her at this point furthers
      this failure.

      <<<<Upon attempting
      a vaginal examination of Nicole, he felt the legs of her child and without
      notice or warning attempted to extract the child from her womb. Dr. Bank
      employed such force that he literally tore Brandon's body from his head
      delivering only his body leaving his head within her womb. >>>>

      Without notice or explanation, this would not be considered normal procedure.
      The fact that this doctor lied and left the head within her womb also
      endangered her life at this point from toxicity. With these oversights proven
      I
      believe she would be entitled to fiscally compensation from such trauma on
      many
      levels.

      An exact figure I am not sure of but for this pregnancy alone, yes.
      ________________________________


      -------Original Message-------



      The abortions don't influence me in this case. I think that not only
      should both the doctors lose their licenses, but both should be
      imprisoned - isn't "reckless endangerment" a felony? This woman could
      have died.

      I don't know about fetal life, but definitely pain and suffering, and
      they should bear all costs of any mental or physical treatment the
      poor woman obtains.





      ________________________________________________________________________
      ________________________________________________________________________
      Subject: Re: Mother delivers child's head

      This is a horrific situation. If all facts are exactly as presented, it also
      is one of those cases that might be damaged by the tort reforms being
      suggested.

      1) What bias or prejudice will Nicole face for her abortions?

      The jury will need to be carefully chosen for this case. I think that
      abortions, regardless of the NARAL rhetoric, have always raised eyebrows. People,
      women in particular, have fought for the right to have an abortion, but the truth
      is that very few women actually want one, or get one. Even "enlightened"
      liberal-minded folk who may say so to the contrary, don't like to think of someone
      - especially themselves or someone they are close to - having an abortion.
      There is a sense of it being a 'dirty little business'. This inherent prejudice
      about abortion in general, coupled with the high moral context of recent
      years, and I think there will be a problem with this.

      In addition, it has been my experience that men and women think of abortion
      differently, and both have their biases. Men seem to fall generally into two
      camps (I know this is sweeping generalization, however I do believe it has
      validity) - those who fault the woman for not giving the man the right to decide if
      he wanted the child or not (these men tend to be a bit older, fathers and/or
      men who want to be fathers, and strong believers in father's rights - they are
      also men who may tend to see the pregnant woman as a vessel for the unborn
      child, instead of a fully-functional human being), and those who immediately
      equate the "need" for abortion as an indication that the woman is 1) not too
      smart if she can't keep herself from getting pregnant; 2) a loose woman who needs
      abortions because she's gotten pregnant with the wrong man's child (i.e., not
      her husband/boyfriend's); 3) or some combination of the two (usually younger,
      under 40, unmarried or divorced, no children, with a negative
      view of women generally).

      Unless there is a justifiable medical reason for the abortions, the issue may
      be the only stumbling block to receiving a favorable judgment.

      2) What is the full monetary value of the life of a 19-20 week old
      fetus?

      For me, this question is a conundrum. It is impossible for me to put a
      monetary value on another's life - child or adult, and personally to do so seems
      somehow to cheapen that life. I don't think I'm alone in this feeling. For that
      reason, I think that the monetary award needs to soft-pedal the notion that it
      is reimbursing Nicole for her dead child. Instead it needs to rather focus on
      the genuine pain and suffering (will she be able to have children after this
      experience? if no, is the reason physical or emotional?) of Nicole. Anyone,
      especially anyone with a child, will understand the horror of the experience,
      especially delivering her child's head at home. I can't even imagine the
      long-term psychological effects such a nightmare is likely to have.

      However, you did ask for a monetary value....assuming that the child was able
      to grow up healthy and well, he could potentially have earned several million
      dollars in his lifetime. I think that earning potential is the only
      consideration that should be made. Anything more simply feels too much like buying a
      child, and that's very mercenary.

      3) Is Nicole is entitled to recover money for her child's death?

      Another touchy question...Is she entitled to be paid for her child? (see
      question 2) Is she entitled to receive monetary compensation (one might suggest in
      lieu of criminal charges against the doctor who delivered her)? yes

      My feeling is that if the recovery is seen as a punishment, since criminal
      charges are apparently not going to be filed, then yes, she would definitely be
      entitled.

      4) Is she entitled to recover for her mental pain and suffering?

      Yes. I don't know what the civil law is regarding "pain and suffering", but
      I'm certain that in this case at least emotional pain and suffering could be
      proved. This whole experience for her must have been traumatic, but delivering
      only a portion of her child at home, would be a major trauma of the kind that
      can cause PTSD. Yes, I think she should be awarded a judgment for pain and
      suffering.

      5) What amount of money will fairly compensate her for the experience
      after her child died where the doctor pulled the child apart, failed to
      retrieve his head and sent her home to deliver her child's head in the
      toilet?

      I knew this was coming and I dreaded it. A million dollars is not too much
      for her personal trauma. Another million (or two) as "punishment" for the two
      doctors which at the very least were negligent in both their time, care and
      decision-making on this high-risk pregnancy. I would ask for $5 million, and hope
      this woman can sleep at night.


      P.S. Are criminal charges ever brought against doctor's in a situation such
      as this? Are doctor's secure from criminal charges in the practice of their
      craft? Thanks.





      ________________________________________________________________________
      ________________________________________________________________________

      Subject: Re: head delivered

      > <<<<Upon attempting
      > a vaginal examination of Nicole, he felt the legs of her child and without
      > notice or warning attempted to extract the child from her womb. Dr. Bank
      > employed such force that he literally tore Brandon's body from his head
      > delivering only his body leaving his head within her womb. >>>>
      >
      We have been given this statement in a vacuum. We don't know what DrB was
      thinking. He could have assumed that the fetus was dead (was it?) and was
      trying
      to deliver her quickly (which is a safety issue). Note: if the fetus was dead
      or fatally compromised, isn't it now illegal to reduce the cranium to deliver
      easily?????


      ______________________


      There are so many breeches of standards in this case (if the information
      provided is correct) that I barely know where to begin. Nicole's attorney should
      add medical malpractice and negligence to the list. Based on what was given, I
      have no doubt there were problems with the nursing staff, as well. This was a
      big teaching hospital with lots of staff at many levels of education and
      experience, right??? The insurance companies should just get together and start
      writing checks.
      ______________________










      Posted: 20



      --"NICOLE"-- is an extremely complex case, which I spent
      several hours thing about, and it forced me to go back 40 years to my
      obstetrics rotation. Based
      on what you wrote, this is a nightmare in obstetrics. The question of
      liability depends on the
      fiduciary relationship between the doctors, with Dr Gold not having any
      liability, Dr Soto with
      mayvbe little liability, and Dr Bank liable for much, and probably criminal
      charges too -- for
      falsifying a medical record. Fetal death per se, is not compensible in all
      states.

      However, This case is still big bucks-- big bucks





      This is a complicated case; my analysis is below (in blue indented type)

      Separate cases can be brought against Drs Soto (a minor contributor) and Dr
      Banks, whose conduct may be criminal as well as civil—which it most certainly
      was. Rare has such incompetence been the cause of such horrible effects in
      medicine. Mistakes do happen, and some are expected in tough cases , and are
      non-compensable (in my opinion); This is a true patient’s nightmare.

      Of course, other factors, not presented, may void all or some of what
      follows. I have not seen the entire record, so what follows is without any discovery
      at all, except with what you wrote.







      Nicole became pregnant with her 8th pregnancy.



      How old is she? How old was she at her first pregnancy? What is the spacing
      of her

      Back to top


      Guest






      Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 12:04 am Post subject:



      sounds like Nicole has a very good malpractice suit, not only against Dr.
      Soto but everyone involved in her pregnancy including the Hospital Dr. Soto
      works for. As far as the bias against Nicole for prior abortions, with a
      good attorney he/she should be able to keep that out of court as
      "irrelevance".
      Did the fibroid tumors cause or have any thing to do with her
      misscarriages?. I don't know what state this occured in, but the state of
      California has
      recently changed the law and placed a $250.000 cap on wrongful death suits. I
      know you say a video tape and photographs were taken, but what happened to
      the
      baby's head after it was delivered in the toilet? I believe this is a key
      piece of evidence of shown to a jury. I hope Nicole gets every dollar she
      deserves, however she will need extensive mental and physical treatment. I
      hope I
      was able to help.


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.