Terrible Pharmacy Mistake

[xotoxi]

...the first thing they do is they take it out of the bag and have you look at it to see if that med is you or the one you are picking it up for, then they explain how to give the med and then ask you if this is right.

I agree that is a safe way to do things.

 

[xotoxi]

Really, for a pregnant woman to be so cavalier about what she ingests as to not read a label before taking medication is quite sad.

Most pragnent girls that I've encountered are reluctant to even take tylenol which is safer than safe in pragnency.

 

[xotoxi]

I hope whoever did this to her never sees a positive balance in their bank account for the rest of their natural life.

Even if absolutely nothing comes of it? Pregnancy goes fine...baby normal...childhood, adolesence normal?

Are you saying this just because the pregnant woman got mentally stressed that she'd taken a potentially dangerous med?

 

[xotoxi]

Live through it the way my family has, and the way I have. Live through it because of a doctor "missing" something on a routine test. Live through it when a child has to suffer due to "mistakes" that were made. Live through it when that child cries because every doctor he sees wants to stick a needle in him to try to "solve his problem", and get an article in a journal. Live through it when your sister wishes she would have aborted your nephew, instead of his living a life of pain.

Do this, then come back and see me about why I shouldn't wish the torments on the damned on imbeciles who make "mistakes".

And isn't it funny how, when those simple tests are reviewed by another doctor, the "missed results" are seen in a matter of minutes.

Oops.

Are you one of those crazies who does not accept anything less than 100% perfection from doctors?

 

[Madeline]

What if the child develops ADHD...and some "expert witness" (i.e. quack) claims that ADHD can be caused by methotrexate exposure in utero.

BAM! There's your case.

Yanno, xotoxi, it is not entirely fair to blame these kinds of cases on lawyers. Who invented the diagnosis of ADHD? Doctors. Who would connect the ADHD to the mistake? Doctors.

IRL, as we both know, the pharmacy will be all over those parents to settle by the end of the week.

It is fair to blame these cases on the lawyers because the lawyers are the ones that construct the case...especially in cases that are not cut and dry.

And I said that the ADHD would be connected to the mistake by a doctor...an "expert witness". In the court, and "expert opinion" is considered fact, even if the opinion is completely false. It is the defenses job to shoot down the "expert opinion" with other expert opinion...and hopefully the jury will believe the truth.

That's why people and doctors can get sued for a bad outcome when they didn't actually perform malpractice. The whole system sucks and is part of the reason why medical care is so expensive. I have personally ordered unnecessary tests because if I didn't, and something went to court, they would say why didn't you do this test which all of your colleagues do...even if there is evidence against doing the test.

Xotoxi, you make a valid point. Expert witness testimony is a source of potential unfairness in certain cases, and in particular, med mal. I do not favor reforms like requiring a lawyer to get three independent MD opinions before he can file suit -- IMO, that is a cart before the horse thingie. But I would support reforms that keep professional expert witnesses off the stand.

I think that it should be a rule that if you do not spend at least 75% of your time practicing medicine, then you cannot testify as an expert witness on medicine. I think these professional whores who do nothing BUT testify harm the whole system.

 

[Madeline]

Yanno, xotoxi, it is not entirely fair to blame these kinds of cases on lawyers. Who invented the diagnosis of ADHD? Doctors. Who would connect the ADHD to the mistake? Doctors.

IRL, as we both know, the pharmacy will be all over those parents to settle by the end of the week.

And I hope the parents don't make the mistake of signing off on a settlement now. They can't know what damage the assistant made until after the birth (if a live birth happens, that is) and what their future expenses for the care of the child will be.

Whoever gave her the wrong woman's medicine, they should be on the hook for the child's medical expenses for the rest of their life.

The statue of limitations on malpractice is usually 2 years. For children, it is 21 years.

SOLs on med mal vary from state to state, xotoxi.

 

[xotoxi]

Yanno, xotoxi, it is not entirely fair to blame these kinds of cases on lawyers. Who invented the diagnosis of ADHD? Doctors. Who would connect the ADHD to the mistake? Doctors.

IRL, as we both know, the pharmacy will be all over those parents to settle by the end of the week.

It is fair to blame these cases on the lawyers because the lawyers are the ones that construct the case...especially in cases that are not cut and dry.

And I said that the ADHD would be connected to the mistake by a doctor...an "expert witness". In the court, and "expert opinion" is considered fact, even if the opinion is completely false. It is the defenses job to shoot down the "expert opinion" with other expert opinion...and hopefully the jury will believe the truth.

That's why people and doctors can get sued for a bad outcome when they didn't actually perform malpractice. The whole system sucks and is part of the reason why medical care is so expensive. I have personally ordered unnecessary tests because if I didn't, and something went to court, they would say why didn't you do this test which all of your colleagues do...even if there is evidence against doing the test.

Xotoxi, you make a valid point. Expert witness testimony is a source of potential unfairness in certain cases, and in particular, med mal. I do not favor reforms like requiring a lawyer to get three independent MD opinions before he can file suit -- IMO, that is a cart before the horse thingie. But I would support reforms that keep professional expert witnesses off the stand.

I think that it should be a rule that if you do not spend at least 75% of your time practicing medicine, then you cannot testify as an expert witness on medicine. I think these professional whores who do nothing BUT testify harm the whole system.

I practice family medicine, but with my qualifications (a medical degree), I could be an "expert witness" in a neurosurgery case. Granted, the defense would shred me, but if they were unable to, the my "expert opinion" would be used by the jury, even if I was making shit up.

 

[xotoxi]

And I hope the parents don't make the mistake of signing off on a settlement now. They can't know what damage the assistant made until after the birth (if a live birth happens, that is) and what their future expenses for the care of the child will be.

Whoever gave her the wrong woman's medicine, they should be on the hook for the child's medical expenses for the rest of their life.

The statue of limitations on malpractice is usually 2 years. For children, it is 21 years.

SOLs on med mal vary from state to state, xotoxi.

That's true, but still children SOLs are in the range of decades.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Live through it the way my family has, and the way I have. Live through it because of a doctor "missing" something on a routine test. Live through it when a child has to suffer due to "mistakes" that were made. Live through it when that child cries because every doctor he sees wants to stick a needle in him to try to "solve his problem", and get an article in a journal. Live through it when your sister wishes she would have aborted your nephew, instead of his living a life of pain.

Do this, then come back and see me about why I shouldn't wish the torments on the damned on imbeciles who make "mistakes".

And isn't it funny how, when those simple tests are reviewed by another doctor, the "missed results" are seen in a matter of minutes.

Oops.

Are you one of those crazies who does not accept anything less than 100% perfection from doctors?

No, I'm one of those crazies who thinks that if a doctor orders a test, he or she should know how to read and interpret the results, or be smart enough to consult another doctor who does. When a patient brings up a concern because of a prior instance of a problem in the family, and the doctor tells them "there's no indication" of that condition, the patient makes their decision on his word.

For them to hear later, from doctor after doctor, "I don't know how he missed that" and "it's clearly evident in these results" means the first dumbass didn't know what he was doing.

Had "Doctor" Moron given my sister the true results, she would have aborted, but she trusted him and now my nephew has to go through tests and operations to try to help. And even then, he will never have a normal life or a normal appearance.

I know that 99+% of medical professionals are good caring people that do the very best they can on a daily basis under trying conditions to help alleviate the pain and suffering of others, and I applaud them for this. It's the less than 1% who are only in it for the money, and don't bother to think how their indifference impacts their patients, that I think should be put up against a wall and shot. And if we can't do that, we need to find a way to take that ill-gotten money from them so that they never know what a hot meal tastes like for the rest of their life.

 

[Madeline]

Well, it would help if the state boards of medicine would grow a pair and strike a bad MD every now and again. You can bet that for every malpractice suit filed, 10+ complaints to the board were made and no action was taken. And what excuse is there for admitting an MD who has been disciplined in one state to practice medicine in another?

99% of gross negligence is committed by 1% of MDs, IMO. If these dim bulbs, elderly men, drug abusers, etc. were banned from the practice, the safety of patients would soar.

 

[boedicca]

The blame is two sided, with more of it on the side of the pharmacy. But even if the pharmacy makes a mistake, an individual can prevent harm to herself by reading the bottle before consuming the medication.

Boedicca, if this was your grandbaby that might be destroyed, would you still be talking up the pharmacy's defense? Tell me, in your view, should we just repeal all tort and contract law and close the courthouses for good except for criminal cases?

Negligence of this sort has been a cause of action since the Magna Carta, but naturally, you know better than centuries of legal philosophers.

Where did I absolve the pharmacy of responsibility?

I am pointing out that this entire potential tragedy (we do not know if the baby was harmed) could have been avoided if the mother had bothered to read the label prior to taking the medicine. If I were a grandmother, I would expect my my daughter to take this precaution.

Individual responsibility is always the first, best option in life. If you wish to believe otherwise, so be it.

 

[Madeline]

The blame is two sided, with more of it on the side of the pharmacy. But even if the pharmacy makes a mistake, an individual can prevent harm to herself by reading the bottle before consuming the medication.

Boedicca, if this was your grandbaby that might be destroyed, would you still be talking up the pharmacy's defense? Tell me, in your view, should we just repeal all tort and contract law and close the courthouses for good except for criminal cases?

Negligence of this sort has been a cause of action since the Magna Carta, but naturally, you know better than centuries of legal philosophers.

Where did I absolve the pharmacy of responsibility?

I am pointing out that this entire potential tragedy (we do not know if the baby was harmed) could have been avoided if the mother had bothered to read the label prior to taking the medicine. If I were a grandmother, I would expect my my daughter to take this precaution.

Individual responsibility is always the first, best option in life. If you wish to believe otherwise, so be it.

Where did I ever say individual responsibility was a bad thing? But boedicca, there's a reason some drugs require a doctor's script and a pharmacist to dispense them...because lay people cannot decide for themselves what to take and when. You seem to gloss over the ginormous deviation from the standard of care the pharmacy committed and laser in on the woman's willingness to rely on them -- which she is entitled to do -- without being on guard.

Your name is not required to be on Rx labels so you can see if you were given the wrong medicine, boedicca. It is required to be on there so that 3rd parties can see it belongs to you, or so that if you share a home with someone, you tell which is yours. It would be prudent to check your pills in a PDR as well, but again, you are entitled to rely on the quality of care you get from an expert licensed by the state.

 

[boedicca]

Oh Puh-leeeeze.

The name is there for more than one purpose. Anyone who shares a medicine cabinet knows how important it is to have the name on one's medication.

I'm sticking with my POV: the best defense is to take responsibility and double check the label.

 

[Madeline]

Oh Puh-leeeeze.

The name is there for more than one purpose. Anyone who shares a medicine cabinet knows how important it is to have the name on one's medication.

I'm sticking with my POV: the best defense is to take responsibility and double check the label.

Why stop there? Why not buy a PDR and double-check the pill image?

Your POV on personal responsibility has **** all to do with the pharmacy's liability to this couple, if their baby is harmed. I know it, you know it, and evidentially admitting it is giving you heartburn, so I won't press you.