It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help Your Doctor Be Honest With You

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 03:42 PM
First of all, How many of us think:
Our Doctors are holding back information?
Not sharing their true opinions?
Not giving us access to our own data?
Not informing us of alternative treatments?
Not informing us of dangers in the accepted treatments?
Not treating their own friends and families the same as their paying customers?

I think yes, to all of the above. I went through about 6 or 7 doctors before I found my current one that I trust. He is willing to look at my research and he is willing to let me be the final decision maker on my treatments and on my children's treatments!

So, Why was it so hard to find an "honest" doctor?
Because they are paranoid of liability. If they follow accepted protocol at all times, they are shielded from litigation, but if they go out on a limb just a little bit, then they are entirely on their own when something goes wrong! The decisions they make are "business decisions" and not treatments. I don't blame them. People love to sue. Sometimes things go wrong and grieving families look for a scapegoat. It is a flawed system.

So, why start this thread?
I think I have a solution, and I want the input from our qualified ATSers! (Especially our Health Professionals and Attorneys.)

There is probably profit potential in the idea, and if somebody wants to run with it from that angle, just remember to cut me in somehow.

We need a "Hold Harmless" Agreement to take to our Doctors.
A sort of contract between an informed patient and an honest doctor. The patient would agree to hold the doctor harmless from litigation in the case of a treatment gone bad, and in return the doctor would agree to provide all manners of information, test results, treatment options, and opinions openly and honestly without fear of retribution.

The "informed patient" would be free to provide research and experiments from around the globe and holistic medicines and rumors and conspiracies to the Doctor, and the doctor would agree to read through, evaluate and comment on their risks vs. benefits.

The "doctor" would be free to provide opinions about the silliness, ineffectiveness, or dangers in alternative treatments, and the doctor would also be free to provide opinions based in logic and experience and fact as to why certain unapproved treatments actually make sense. Doctors may suggest diets and herbs and massage and acupuncture over pain medications and anti-depressants. Doctors are far more educated and versed in the pros and cons of these treatments, and many of them partake in alternative therapies for their own families, but not for their paying customers.

I believe that if a Doctor were approached with this idea, that they would be skeptical, but given time to review the form, maybe have an attorney look it over, they would come around, and Average Doctors could be come Excellent Doctors!

(A little history of my experience and how my opinion came about.)
I had a son born over 3 months prematurely. He was 2lbs, 0 ounces. He languished in what was supposed to be a very good hospital for 3 months without gaining weight and without adequate lung development. The Doctors would take him on and off of Oxygen because they were afraid of damaging his eyes. While he was off the Oxygen his saturation would drop below 80% and I was concerned with brain damage. I had to literally accost nurses and doctors and become a nuisance and sometimes even a danger to their operations to get them to talk to me. I had the police called on me more than once. Eventually I found a Doctor, and a Surgeon, and I arranged a transfer of the Baby to Shands Hospital in Gainesville, but it still required a Doctor to sign and fax a release. After waiting another 48 hours with no release, I had to barge into an office, force open a door, slam down a telephone with a nurse dialing the police, physically move a doctor into an office with a fax machine, stand by with threats of violence while they signed and faxed the release, and then explain my actions to the police department. My baby was life-flighted the next morning, surgery the next afternoon, full recovery within 2 days, and was at home for the first time within a week! All due to my wife and I's actions and negotiable doctors. Shands is a research hospital, the surgeon flew in for several surgeries that day, and then flew back to the West Coast. Unfortunately, they lost one of the babies that he operated on that day, but there was no fear of litigation because of the different requirements for a research hospital, and all the different paperwok that was signed. My baby immediately became a baby. First smile, first cuddling, first time at home with his momma!

Then 5 months later!
My baby developed "Infantile Spasms" (Google it, there are no good prognoses)
It was likely due to a combination of low oxygen, delayed brain development, combined with several strong antacids given in the original hospital against protocol, and was then aggravated and the direct result of 4 shots given simultaneously by the Pediatrician's office into a 5 lb baby! Too many vaccines, in too small of a baby, plus they were from "multi-dose" vials which DO CONTAIN mercury derivatives as preservatives. Everyone says the "vaccines" don't contain this stuff, and that is correct, but the bottles that contain the multiple doses of the vaccines do contain the preservatives! (Demand "single-dose" vials if you get your kids vaccinated.)*******Same old local hospital didn't diagnose correctly for 3 weeks. Luckily a young ER doc did get it right after watching a video my wife had taken. Local Neurologist started 2 medicines and scheduled us to see him again in 6 months. (Seems not so bad, but wait til you see what a "real" doctor prescribed!)

Now, with my previous experience I was more prepared this time. Thank You Internet. Within days we had the top Neurologist in the country (Dr. Carney) willing to see the Baby for a second opinion. Made the trip back to Shands. Dr. Carney ordered the dosages of medicines dropped to a bare minimum. He ordered weekly follow ups with EEG's every Monday, and a follow up with him every week! He ordered Physical Therapy, and Occupational Therapy twice per week to stimulate the baby's development between his brain and his peripheral nervous system. He ordered NO MORE VACCINES without his approval. He ordered specific baby formula that was free of certain chemicals. He personally visited with us every single visit, and he called us himself (not a nurse) with the results of every single EEG! Once we could not get an appointment to get the EEG and bloodwork done the same day as his visit, and he got on my wife's cell phone, told the lab that this baby had infantile spasms, it was a priority, and it was going to get done today, AND IT DID!

I am happy to say that my now 2 and 1/2 year old is running, talking, and has no learning disabilities, and has been 1 1/2 years with clean EEG's and no seizures. Basically a 100% full recovery! (Sadly, a couple of parents we know from contacts at the differen offices did not seek out Dr. Carney, and they are having many, many complications, and even one death.)

Long story short:
Informed care, due diligence, and the correct doctors that are willing to attack an ailment from all directions with all of their arsenal are the key to making full recoveries! I won't hypothesize at all the conspiracies that surround the motivations for not treating people as well as they could, but I will sugget that maybe this "Hold Harmless" agreement, along with better-informed patients, and Doctors that truly want to do a good job, may be the secret to Good Healthcare!

[edit on 1-7-2010 by getreadyalready]

[edit on 1-7-2010 by getreadyalready]

[edit on 1-7-2010 by getreadyalready]

posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 04:17 PM
Each patient is not a replica of another and each patients physiology will not equate to another. If patient A gets better quicker from the same treatment given to patient B, it has to be the doctor's fault.

Medicine is not a exact science, because all patients are not created equal. One always has to follow the recommended guidelines & procedures to see if they work before trying something different. The physician always will know which route to use on a case by case basis.

Medicine is a balancing act between Risk vs. Benefits. Do the benefits outweigh the risks enough to do a certain procedure or try a certain medicine.

I have never heard of doctors withholding information, in fact if you change physicians or request your own medical info you can obtain it.

Every physician must inform of all dangers with a selected treatment, it is the law and common practice.

As per your example regarding your situation, premature infants are more prone to infections and problems than a infant at close to full term (38-40wks). Premie treatment is a very fine balancing act that will never be the same for each case.

Oxygen Toxicity is what I believe the medical professionals in charge your child's case must have been worried about. You can also google oxygen toxicity to learn about the detrimental affects it can have.

Oxygen Toxicity in a Premature Infant....

[edit on 1-7-2010 by prionace glauca]

posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 04:33 PM
reply to post by prionace glauca

Thank you for your response. Oxygen toxicity was one of the concerns with my infant, but they were unwilling to try the surgery, and instead they insisted on harsh drugs to close is PDA off. The drugs had many known side-effects. In addition, they were prescribing 2 powerful antacids that had not been tested on infants and per the drug-makers recommendations were not approved for infants. They also refused to let me see the ultrasounds of his bowels and chest, they refused to release the results of blood tests, and the Doctors refused to meet me, the avoided me completely and sent nurses out to intercept me. I literally had to use force and obstruct the whole operation in the NICU to get a Doctor to bring in the Medical File and go over it with me. I felt terrible, because those other babies needed care as well, but I had to do what was best for my baby.

Now, as for the topic at hand. Don't you feel that the Doctors would be even more forthcoming with their opinions if there was no litigation threat hanging around? I know in Florida a lot of Doctors have taken early retirement rather than purchase malpractice insurance. One Ob-Gyn has a sign posted on his front door that reads, "No Malpractice Insurance, if this is a problem, seek out another Doctor. Any frivolous lawsuits will be aggressively defended and counter-sued." Now that Doctor has certainly had some issues!

I know every patient is different, that is why I made the distinction "informed patient." In a lot of cases, I know more than my Doctor. In all cases, I know more about my personal tolerances, experiences, and current condition than my Doctor. Therefore, I should be the one directing the Doctor on what tests and what medications are acceptable. The Doc gives recommendations, I listen, I make suggestions, we debate, and I make the final decision. Won't work for everybody, but it is the only way for me!

The "Hold-Harmless" agreement is just an incentive for Doctors to treat patients like me. IMHO it would free up Doctors to use their judgement more often, and stop relying on mainstream published and accepted treatments, and let them rely on their own intuition and experience a little more.

What do you think about the agreement in and of itself? Good or bad?

posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 06:35 PM
reply to post by getreadyalready

I think this agreement is a great idea. There is a problem though, some doctors really are bad doctors and if patients don't know these doctors are bad doctors then no matter how much advice they get it will inevitably be incorrect. Sometimes people really are just stupid and need protecting and by using these agreements some of these people who would have good cause for a real lawsuit, not even a frivolous one, would not be able to sue. I think the overall good would far outweigh the bad but there would be serious difficulties to protect the people who do need protecting.

Overall this is a great idea. You should check into why they didn't give you those files though b/c they are required by law to provide those files with every single doctors note they have made.

new topics

top topics

log in