To show that that was negligent one would have to show that a resposible body
of A/E practitioners ( or whatever you were at time) would have diagnosed the
crush fracture by doing something or knowing something that you did not, AND
that the pain and suffering was a direct result of the failure to diagnose and
not just what the injury would have caused anyway. My guess is that someone
pointed out that whether or not the failure to diagnose the fracture was
defensible; the fact that the fracture was not known about AND that she had
physio meant that the treatment was more painful than it might have been or
that had the fracture been known then the treatment would not have been
physio.
>>> Tony Adams 09/01/05 01:42pm >>>
> In my experience the claims are so far beyond the date everything happened
> that juniors are rarely still around. It is the consultants who get upset
> when
> the trust says it is going to settle without a fight.
Point taken John.
My concern was for the SpRs on the list who are often around for long
enough.
I certainly was around for long enough as an SHO on my surgical rotation
with an out of court settlement for £500, with someone who presented with
gluteal pain 3 weeks after a fall onto her bottom, had difficulty mobilising
and gluteal tenderness; documented no lumbar vertebral tenderness. Referred
for physio; found physio very painful; sent back to the ED and had x-ray
which showed L3 crush #.
Settlement was for the pain and suffering (exacerbated by physiotherapy).
Negligent?
Tony
|