"Would the doctor even tell you if there was a problem going on?"

[grendslori]

There is a post here on the forum that has really taken off from legal matters to patients trying to figure out how screwed up the health care system is here and abroad (the UK). One of the topics throughout that post is whether or not a doctor would even tell you if there was a problem; I wanted to keep this going to see if any of you have found this to be the case.

I do want to address Kenkeith as he believes a doctor would never withhold information, even life threatening information, which happened in our case. (we were told our daughter had nothing wrong with her heart at 6 years other than WPW. She had a severe cardiomyopathy (HCM), ended up in heart failure by 13 and had to have a transplant at 22) Doctors do have issues with patients even going as far as to not treat them while they are hospitalized. Here's an example, Ken, I would like to know what you think about this:

My daughter was seen at a major medical center who had a pediatric cardiology department with 2 physicians; one being her doctor. She went into A-Fib (which could have killed her because of the Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy; this is a very serious problem because of the HCM) The night she was admitted, her own cardiologist was there, but he left for a week the following day. The other cardiologist refused to take care of her for that week; we saw him several times because he had one of his patients on the same floor . He never once came to see our daughter or do anything to help her, not even when she had to be transferred to the CCU  (Coronary Care Unit) when she got into trouble one night, The residents on the floor took care of her, even though they didn't really know what they were doing either. ( I can't blame them for that one) What do you think about a doctor like that? (Don't kid yourself, our doctor was absolutely LIVID when he returned the following week. So not only have doctors withheld information from us; they have gone as far as to not treating her! Remember that if a doctor does not tell you something, you don't know about it unless you really understand exactly what is going on to ask the right questions. I knew the questions to ask and all it got me was a doctor and his group of 10-12 Fellows who were obviously TORKED off at my audasity to even question them! We have been all over this country to the best medical facilities this country has to offer from Houston's Medical Centers ,to The National Insitutes of Health; we've seen good doctors and bad, believe me! There are A LOT of doctors out there who withold information from their patients; they judge you on how they think you will react to what they say and if they see any panic, they watch what they say, just the same as when medical records get rewritten saying tests were done on a certain day, even if you have had a blotched up surgery. (My major surgery actually disappeared from my hospital records and was replaced with a cath report that had actually been done 5 years earlier!!)  So, as I asked earlier, what do you think about things like these happening? ( I do want to add a note that the doctors who first diagnosed my daughter as being perfectly fine were in the UK, not the US)

Anyone else out there have experiences like this?    

[erijon]

I think you miss the point, your comment;

"Big mistake, doctors - PARTICULARLY when you're ignorant about the fact that something often can be done and you're just unaware."

This statement makes no sense and it implied that a doctor would withhold information because they're ignorant, that was a pretty damming statement. There are legitimate reasons for a doctor to withhold something if it has no prognostic value. The tone of your comment was overtly negative towards the medical profession as a whole. I also don't think you can compare the two professions. Lawyers work by a code in which they are bound to follow when interpreting law, it's all black and white in written form outlining the way they must conduct themselves.  Medicine is a science and as such is subject to many variables, some that do not apply from patient to patient. What is medically relevant to one may not be to another. Much of what a doctor does is conjecture and the risk must be weighed against the benefit, not something that has to be done in the legal profession.

FYI, I have paid more than $200 for a short visit to an attorney that gave me terrible advice and they had no problem taking my money or thought to give it back when he was wrong.

[nickppatel]

The legal profession certainly has its share of crooks, but that is irrelevant.  The issue is whether doctors might withhold information.  I've run across cases in which the doctor admitted to withholding information.  This is not a subjective issue - it's a fact.  It happened.  It has nothing to do with the plaintiff's argument, lawyers' trustworthiness, or any other such factor.  

If one doctor has done it, it's not unreasonable to think that many have done it but have gone undetected.

If you want to talk about lawyers, which is an entirely separate issue, I'd say they are generally misrepresented.  Many lawyers pad their bills, but that doesn't mean that all lawyers do so.  One could point out that doctors walk in the door, give terrible advice with terrible bedside manner, walk out and charge $200 for a 5 minute visit that produced no results.  Sounds like bill-padding to me.  But that doesn't mean all doctors are crooks.  Most lawyers and doctors I know abide by strict codes of professional responsibility, the violation of which can ruin their careers.

[kenkeith]

I put incompetence of doctors under the unbrella of unsuitability.  That not only includes improperly trained but not able/fit to practice effectively.  It can include in house pressures to meet a quota,  pressure to reduce costs, etc.  As an example is HMO insurance.  The policy includes their own doctors under contract as well as some hospitials.  That is a perscription for abuse of patients' health care.  A good, competent doctor does not work in that environment.  A component doctor does not have a motive to lie.

I have read there is discussion for rewarding hospitals included in the Healthcare Reform
plan.  Hospitals can be rewarded on successful treatment of a patient by acknowledging those hospitals that have fewer rehospitalization rate.  That would be reasonable and no problem.  But rewarding a doctor for successful treatment doesn't motivate good medical care as the doctor may only treat those patients where there a good possibility of a successful ooutcome.

Nick, I had 3 close relatives that are/were attorneys.  My brother-in-law died of liver damage and he was an associate of a large firm in Miami. Florida.  The profession engages in dishonest billing, hours misrepresented, hours aren't actually worked but charged to the client, the rate by associate is billed at  partners fee, etc.  and that is learned very early in the career of an attorney.  It has already been said if a doctor fails to make a diagnosis or misdiagnose there are avenues of redress. Competent doctors are motivated to tell the truth, attorneys are motivated to lie...guess who I would believe.

Frankly, I can't believe that a doctor knew, then withheld information because (s)he didn't think there is any successful treatment available. To take that  position just doesn't make sense!  Obviously, that would be the plaintiff's position in a lawsuit and good material to review for class discussion.

[ed34]

I think its a mixture of things. Firstly as I stated in another post, Cardiologists are under a lot of pressure due to the number of patients they have to deal with. On average, each cardiologist in the UK has 60 patients to handle. If we say a third of these are severe cases, it is still too much to handle. However, the more they get through, the better their performance looks and the better the hospital targets look, making more money in the form of bonuses available to cardiologists. Now, like most humans, cardiologists want a good return for their hard work. I know many think they are all samaritans, but they are not, or else they wouldn't have big houses and the latest cars etc. Most have their children attending private schools so there is really no charity involved here.
A cardiologist is going to deal with the cases he feels will be successful first, putting the others on hold or really making it appear that something is being done, such as altering medication. I experienced this when seeing one particular consultant. He said he wanted to see me every week and each week he said a decision would soon be made. Six whole months later, I asked "whats the point in me coming here. Either you cant do anything and are stringing me along, or you are using me to look like progress on your statistics". He agreed instantly that nothing could be done and suggested I try a different hospital, but it took 6 months for him to say this and only because I got angry and questioned him. As patients we dont see the politics/economics of the hospitals but if you stay in hospital for a long period of time it soon becomes apparent there are immoral things going on.

[erijon]

A little over cynical I would say. I understand how some have experienced issues, but I would have to say it would be more a case of incompetence than withholding information. Do some doctors make mistakes? I'm sure they do just as lawyers do, pilots do, law enforcement officials do as well. I just don't think a doctor would take the time to test and diagnose a patient and then think, "I believe I'll just keep this information to myself". Why would a competent doctor find a life threatening condition and with hold that information? I know that I have always checked my doctor's record and background on line, pretty easy to get that information. I wouldn't see one that had a bad track record and I am capable of making that decision.

I am certainly more skeptical of lawyers than I am doctors, there is more of an opportunity to gain from some one's misery as a lawyer with far less consequences. I have had more bad dealings with lawyers in my career than I have with doctors so that is the experience I base my thinking on but I don't condemn all lawyers, I check their record out before I deal with one. Others have a different perspective I'm sure

I know there are others who disagree and for good reason, but I just think for the most part the medical profession can be trusted. We all have to do our parts, be informed, ask the hard questions and if something doesn't make sense, get another opinion.

JMHO...............

[nickppatel]

Of course some doctors withhold information.  As a law student I have come across cases in which doctors didn't tell their patients they had life-threatening problems because the doctors didn't think anything could be done to help them.  Big mistake, doctors - PARTICULARLY when you're ignorant about the fact that something often can be done and you're just unaware.