Angel of death or compassionate physician?

[MillCreek]

https://www.fox2detroit.com/news/doctor-acquitted-in-14-patient-deaths-sues-health-system

https://apnews.com/article/fa6587e9a73a0f7f59ff63f6b94e1545

https://apnews.com/article/health-ohio-columbus-e9dcc1356cfd9ec3dbeda4e6526bcc20

Interesting that the physician was acquitted of all 14 counts of murder.  Bearing in mind that I know nothing about this case other than what I have read in the media above, if I was the risk manager there, I would also have fired him, reported him to the medical board and notified law enforcement.  Now of course the hospital is paying out millions of dollars in lawsuits.

[BobR]

Husel’s colleagues who administered the medications weren’t criminally charged, but the hospital system said it fired 23 nurses, pharmacists and managers after its internal investigation and referred various employees to their respective state boards for possible disciplinary action.

I wonder what will happen to all of these people now? It is a messed up situation no matter how you look at it.

bob

[MechAg94]

One patient, 82-year-old Melissa Penix, was given 2,000 micrograms of fentanyl and died a few minutes later. Dr. John Schweig of Tampa Bay General Hospital testified for the prosecution that Penix “definitely was not terminal, nor was continuing medical care futile.”

Did they fail to prove the case or did they try to go after too many murder counts and confused the issue?  If I were a juror, over 50 prosecution witnesses would all run together especially if they didn't provide substantially different testimony.  Also, If more than a few murder counts didn't look good, I would be inclined to acquit on all of them. 

The jury deliberated for 6 days so I imagine there was a lot of debate and disagreement in that group. 

[230RN]

https://www.fox2detroit.com/news/doctor-acquitted-in-14-patient-deaths-sues-health-system

https://apnews.com/article/fa6587e9a73a0f7f59ff63f6b94e1545

https://apnews.com/article/health-ohio-columbus-e9dcc1356cfd9ec3dbeda4e6526bcc20

Interesting that the physician was acquitted of all 14 counts of murder.  Bearing in mind that I know nothing about this case other than what I have read in the media above, if I was the risk manager there, I would also have fired him, reported him to the medical board and notified law enforcement.  Now of course the hospital is paying out millions of dollars in lawsuits.

And faced the possibility of him coming back at you or your company?   Your evidence for firing could not have been greater than the DA had in the actual trial which was found lacking by the jury, so your firing would have been unjustified anyway and you (your company) would be facing the same kind of lawsuit.

In other words, the outcome would probably have been the same... him (or them) suing you for the same reasons:  lack of evidence to justify your firing.  The "reporting" probably would have been OK, but not the firing.

Nutshell:  he was not guilty.  Therefore your theoretical firing would have been unjustified. 

Terry, 230RN

[Bogie]

I wonder how many families of 'vid patients who died after being vented "because it is protocol" have sued?

[dogmush]

Nutshell:  he was not guilty.  Therefore your theoretical firing would have been unjustified. 

Terry, 230RN

Counterpoint:  The standard of evidence needed for firing someone is significantly lower than that of convicting someone of murder.  There could well be enough evidence to juswtify firing him and still leave reasonable doubt in the minds of a jury.

Counterpoint 2:  He's guilty as hell.  He gave doses of fentanyl to people that would be immediately fatal to 100% of the population.  The people he gave those doses to where not all dying right then, or in hospice/on palliative care only, nor had further treatment been deemed futile by their other doctors.  Outside of Oregon that's illegal.

[MillCreek]

And faced the possibility of him coming back at you or your company?   Your evidence for firing could not have been greater than the DA had in the actual trial which was found lacking by the jury, so your firing would have been unjustified anyway and you (your company) would be facing the same kind of lawsuit.

In other words, the outcome would probably have been the same... him (or them) suing you for the same reasons:  lack of evidence to justify your firing.  The "reporting" probably would have been OK, but not the firing.

Nutshell:  he was not guilty.  Therefore your theoretical firing would have been unjustified. 

Terry, 230RN

Your comment illustrates the different standard of proof in criminal vs. civil actions. On the basis of 'beyond a reasonable doubt' in criminal actions, he was acquitted.  On the basis of 'more probable than not', in civil actions, he is guilty.  That is why the civil malpractice lawsuits have been successful.  Plus, are you really arguing that if you have a killer on your medical staff, you should keep him on because he has not been convicted yet?

[RoadKingLarry]

I wonder how many families of 'vid patients who died after being vented "because it is protocol" have sued?

My sister in law couldn't find a local lawyer to take the case.

[dogmush]

I wonder how many families of 'vid patients who died after being vented "because it is protocol" have sued?

My sister in law couldn't find a local lawyer to take the case.

I am not an expert, or even very knowledgeable, on malpractice law but it seems like the salient questions would be things like, what was the standard of care being used at the time, what were the patients O2 stats, and would those normally indicate ventilation, and is there any indication the ventilation actually harmed the patient.  MillCreek might be able to weigh in on what kinds of facts a family member would have to bring to a lawyer to make them likely to move forward in the case.

It's worth noting that despite Twitter and forum claims to the contrary during the pandemic, ALL the medical professionals that I know that work in ICUs say that properly monitored vents don't damage lungs over the timeframes people were on them with the coof.  That may be a particularly large hurdle to overcome in any malpractice claim.

[MillCreek]

The three necessary elements to successfully proceed with a malpractice claim are liability, causation, and damages.  You have to show someone did something wrong, provable by expert witnesses; that the wrong thing caused harm; and that resulted in damages.  An experienced plaintiff malpractice attorney lives for the day when a case involving the wrong limb being amputated walks in the door, since liability, causation, and damages are all clear, and such a case will settle quickly with minimal time, effort, and cost on the part of the plaintiff attorney.  The overwhelming majority of cases that walk in the door are not like that, and experienced counsel end up turning down those cases since they know they are not likely to win.  Although it can vary by jurisdiction, 75% or so of all malpractice cases against physicians end up being won by the physicians.

Of the three elements, liability and causation are the most difficult to prove.  We have seen very very few malpractice cases come out of people dying from Covid.  Laypeople who have never laid hands on a patient parroting comments from Twitter, forums, and the like on how patients in the ICU should be managed does not meet the Daubert standard for expert witness testimony.  The real critical care specialists who actually manage the patients were practicing in accordance with the generally recognized medical consensus, and that is the definition of the standard of care.  So if you think you are going to successfully sue on the basis of how someone was managed with Covid and ended up dying, you are going to have a difficult time finding credible medical expert witness testimony on the standard of care and that this proximately caused the patient's death.