Potential malpractice--notify Soc. Security?

[bcubed]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Pennsylvania

Nine years ago, went to see a doctor for suspected obstructive sleep apnea. Was given surgery (UPPP, chin and hyoid suspensions), which I alleged failed 1 wk. post-op. Surgeons disagreed with me, and I was given a "delusional disorder" diagnosis for disagreeing with docs and put on Seroquel (quetiapine) and/or Zyprexa (olanzipine). I went on SSDI disability due to psych. daignosis. What medical intervention I've got (tracheotomy) has been done AMA outside the country.

Now, I've produced medical results (continued OSA despite trach, overnight O2 desaturation and the appearance of a double chin not caused by fat or redundant skin) consistent with structural failure of surgery. As my state has a 7-yr statute of repose, I realise what I need to do for compenstion is ID deviations from accepted stds. within that time frame. However, I still need surgical intervention (ASAP, because I'm having cognitive impairment/confusion concurrent with desaturation).

What I'm wondering: as it's seeming more likely my (legitimate) disability is actually due to medical inaction, not delusion; ought I notify social security of this? The upside would be that they'd have similar incentives to me to get me healthy, plus they'd have way more "pull" than me. On the downside (coming from my--sympathetic--therapst (Ph.D.) who's interacted with SSDI but isn't a lawyer), I've heard if the original basis for disability was wrong, they'll try to recoup from ME and then I'd have to "subrogate" to get my money BACK form the M.D.s!

Should I 1. tell Soc. Sec, 2. NOT tell, 3. Intimate to the medical brass that I'm considering this option should care not be forthcoming?

 

[tranquility]

I am uncertain as to why you refer to a statute of repose as opposed to limitation as from your own facts the damage was patent 1 week after surgery (if being treated by the same doctor(s) that statute may be tolled), but you didn't ask about that.

I am uncertain of your goal as related to social security. If you have a duty to notify them of some fact you now know (based on something you need or needed to swear to in obtaining benefits), do so. If not, don't.

 

[bcubed]

I mentioned the statute of repose because there's TWO time limits: the statute of limitations covers from when one "knew or reasonably should have known." Even if that's good, there's a maximum 7-year "look back." For example: if a doctor exposed you to abnormally high levels of radiation, and you first discovered it when looking back over your records when you get cancer 10 years later, you're out of luck. (At least that's how it was explained to me by a lawyer.) I assume any deviations from "acceptable standards" within the SOR would still be recoverable for their additional harm.

I mention Social Security because I NEED medical intervention to sleep regularly enough to hold a job. Notifying them might help, because of similar interests; having the potential to do so might also motivate the hospital, should they feel me likely to go to social security upon undue delay. I mean, I'm still sleeping poorly enough to be disabled; it just seems likely now that the "delusional disorder" tag was in error.

 

[tranquility]

I mentioned the statute of repose because there's TWO time limits: the statute of limitations covers from when one "knew or reasonably should have known." Even if that's good, there's a maximum 7-year "look back." For example: if a doctor exposed you to abnormally high levels of radiation, and you first discovered it when looking back over your records when you get cancer 10 years later, you're out of luck. (At least that's how it was explained to me by a lawyer.) I assume any deviations from "acceptable standards" within the SOR would still be recoverable for their additional harm.

I know the difference between a statute of repose and limitation. As I wrote:

I am uncertain as to why you refer to a statute of repose as opposed to limitation as from your own facts the damage was patent 1 week after surgery

You knew 1 week after the surgery you were damaged. The statute of repose is for latent issues, not patent ones. Things like your example where the event occurred but the person did not and could not know they were damaged until years later.

I mention Social Security because I NEED medical intervention to sleep regularly enough to hold a job. Notifying them might help, because of similar interests; having the potential to do so might also motivate the hospital, should they feel me likely to go to social security upon undue delay. I mean, I'm still sleeping poorly enough to be disabled; it just seems likely now that the "delusional disorder" tag was in error.

Notifying Social Security will not help you in your stated goal.

 

[ecmst12]

Not to mention even if the damage was NOT patent, it was more then 7 years ago. And the surgery failing doesn't indicate it was done improperly. It does mean you need more surgery, which Medicare (or whoever provides your health insurance now) will pay for.

 

[bcubed]

Okay, I understand.

I am uncertain as to why you refer to a statute of repose as opposed to limitation as from your own facts the damage was patent 1 week after surgery

One week post-op, I felt a snapping sensation, contingent with resumption of symptomaic sleep. at that time, however, NO quantitative results were indicative of sleep disordered breathing. Exploratory surgery WOULD have clarified things, but every one of my (literally) dozen attempts to get same were rebuffed. Numerous hosptials, numerous countries, even.

I mean, theoretically the correlation could have been coincidence; I'm not sure how one would reasonably expect a patient w/o specific medical training to be able to "know" a diagnosis is incorrect if no M.D.s were able to do same.

Ecmst12, it's not the surgery that I feel fails to meet the acceptable standards of care. It's the failure to take reasonable measures when informed by patient of failure of same (I was still employed, albiet on leave, as an airline pilot until disqualified by psych. diagnosis.) Also, even if the surgery, per se, isn't recoverable, what about when additional evidence suggesting error in diagnosis (within the SOR and SOL) was ignored? I posit that--once the psych daignosis was given--M.D.s failed to revisit the diagnosis in light of additional info and what patient was experiencing resembled not health care so much as a particular sort of "contest."

 

[ecmst12]

And again, more then 7 years passed between the surgery, and the discovery of objective evidence that it had failed.

 

[bcubed]

Ok, but within the last 2 years, I got the trach, which allowed me to reduce medication loads and sleep better, which ought to have given reason to revisit the standing diagnosis: it did not. This furthered the damage incurred--otherwise I could have recovered and not been on disability.

I understand that I now miss out on the "whole enchilada," but if I can establish this and other deviations from accepted standards of medical care that exist within the SOL (and possibly SOR), can't I at least get the "side of refried beans?"

 

[ecmst12]

Seeing as you don't have any evidence that the surgery was performed incorrectly in the first place (as I said, failure is not, in itself, evidence of negligence) I see no side of beans for you to get. The main thing you should be concerned with now is getting yourself fixed.

 

[lya]

Even if your claim(s) is found to be medically and legally sound, you have muddied the waters to such an extent that I doubt an attorney would be willing to assist, ie. You have seven years of unapproved medical care that includes receiving some treatment from sources outside the US, including a tracheostomy against US medical advice.

Having a trach does not prevent fatty neck tissue from obstructing sleep. You did not mention what method you use to keep this from happening.

Perhaps you need CPAP to keep your airway open, even with the trach.

If nothing is showing up as an upper airway obstruction's causing your sleep apnea, I suggest that you receive an evaluation from a neurologist. While you sleep, you may be experiencing a decrease in respiratory drive from the brain.

Medicare should pay for a neurological evaluation. They could not care less about whether or not medical malpractice occurred except for one reason and one reason only, to recoup any monies paid to you by SSA that should have been paid to you in an award for damages r/t medical malpractice. You have to win and be awarded damages before that can occur.

I would not concern myself with SSA at this point. I'd have some brain checks done.

Hope all goes well for you,

 

[tranquility]

You had the duty to investigate further. This is the should have known portion of the knew or should have known. Using your argument, the statute of limitations means nothing unless absolutely positively know exactly what is wrong with you. That's not the case. Anyway, as emst12 wrote, under the statute of repose you are SOL anyway.

 

[bcubed]

Having a trach does not prevent fatty neck tissue from obstructing sleep. You did not mention what method you use to keep this from happening.

A trach provides for a redundant airway. As a result, less air flows through the natural airway and there's a corresoponding lower pressure drop (according to Bernoulli's equation, which states the pressure drop is proportional to the square of airflow velocity: less air through natural airway=less pressure drop=less liklihood of apnea.)

You had the duty to investigate further.

My ability to investigate further was PREVENTED by the doctors in question, as well as the mental diagnosis (incorrectly) placed upon me. I asked, I BEGGED, for exploratory surgery in scores of hospitals, in half a dozen states, in three different countries. I'm not sure how much further my "duty" extends! My investigative powers don't amount to much if I lack the authority to order the surgery that would definitively prove/disprove my case. (Believe me, if I could've, I would have done so 8 years ago.)

At present, I have diagnosed obstructive apnea and hypoxemia (despite trach open) and have been to the ER twice this last month due to cognitive impairment. Should care STILL be denied, and later shown to be a deviation from acceptable stds, could THIS (in and of itself) be actionable?

 

[tranquility]

While I understand you want to argue the point, in your instance it is quite clear the statute of limitations and not repose will apply.

 

[bcubed]

While I understand you want to argue the point, in your instance it is quite clear the statute of limitations and not repose will apply.

I'm sorry if I'm coming off combative, but I'm having a hard time understanding your posts. When I talk about wanting to sue for deviations from accepted standards in my continuing aftercare, and you repeatedly mention that the SOR has been exceeded for the initial surgery, I'm not really understanding what sense you are making.

If what you are saying is that, once the SOR is exceeded for the initial surgery, the continuing care can be completely inadequate without recompense, please state that directly.

If you are misunderstanding me, and think that my "aftercare" complaints are an attempt to "end run" the SOR, I assure you they are not.

From what you've told me, I know that the SOL and SOR have been excceded--both of which I stated in my OP, so this imparts no new knowledge.