I was an expert witness in anesthesiology for 35 years. This surgeon did an excellent job in all regards. Composed, articulate, well prepared, and a great physical appearance/bearing. He keeps his cool and avoids argumentation. At one time I worked in the Baltimore Shock Trauma Center and am familiar with the hospitals discussed.
I had a Parkland Doctor during one of my paramedic intubation clinicals ask me if I had ever intubated anyone with an LMA. I replied No. He asked if I knew what LMA stood for. I said yes. Laryngeal mask ??? Something??? He said No! It stands for Let Me Aspirate....I had to laugh!!!!
@@fiddlefolk ok now that was funny. Not in this profession but I do know a ton of medical stuff since I find it fascinating (I definitely missed my calling in life) but that made me laugh). I've been put out with an lma & also had reg intubations before, the lma was less irritating than an Et in my experience.
@@shannon7206 Lmbo! Glad you found the humor Shannon. Yes, for a localized surgery, the LMA is less traumatic but it is also not a secure airway. That was the point of the joke. I was good at intubation and always careful to not be forceful on the vocal cords.
I love listening to people who are as smart and confident as this doctor. I can't imagine what his schedule is like or how he manages all that responsibility. 175 days per year of call would totally suck!....but I'm really happy he's willing to do it...I am sure he has saved a lot of lives! You're awesome Dr. Black!
@@Innamorata1011 we care. Very much. Most of us do, anyway- It’s called compartmentalization. If we were incapable of it, we couldn’t effectively do our jobs.
I may be only an LPN but I was extremely impressed with this expert's testimony, composure next to the attorney's multiple times if repetitive questions. He maintained his kindness and patience regardless. I learned a lot from him during this testimony.
I worked ICUs for 30 years and seen many a doc screw up then rush to cover it up. I've been threatened with termination and ruining my career if I didn't tow their line. The ER staff screwed up royally and try to cover it up.
@@cattycorner8 Some of them so obviously do: NHS medics did this to me in 2005 - they even faked the med records; it has happened to lots of people; therefore you are wrong & very naive.
i like how patient the doctor remains while the guy asks tons of questions that don't make much sense.. the doctor understands that the guy questioning him isn't a doctor and will need guidance. and the guy asking questions is just as professional and keeps trying to adapt as he learns. really interesting.
Having been subjected to a deposition before, when they start throwing hypothetical situations at you that are removed from the facts, you simply say “I cannot hypothesize in this circumstance”.
I am a doc at a “country hospital” (ahem!). This doc has the patience of Job! Most of the questions posed to the doctor are inane. He ( the doc) does his best to reconstruct these questions, and then answer, to give a legitimate, truthful answer based on anatomy and physiology. Mostly to no avail. The interrogating attorney repeatedly tries to put words, favorable to the plaintiff, in the doctors mouth.
@@kkdoc7864 These plaintiff lawyers are unscrupulous as can be. They phrase questions that can only be answered in ways that implicate the physician and don't allow for any further explanation of their answers. In real life, things aren't black and white with simple yes and no explanations.
I will keep it real.This doctor knew how to dodge and duck that one vital question asked and rephrase about10 times just to protect his colleagues. THATS WHY I DONT TRUST THEM.THE RULE IS COVER EACH OTHERS BACK to hell with a man losing a limb.
Ikr. Poor Mr Tolson. Something tells me the Insurance being unwilling to pay for an MRI may have something to do with it. Good Drs would say by the hell with it. He needs an MRI
I have terrible circulation and my feet are often "cold to the touch." That's especially true when I'm in the ER where the temperature seems to always be kept at a comfortable freezing without socks and shoes. Bless those people for always bringing me an extra warmed blanket when I ask.
I want to personally thank the patient for allowing this information to become public as an education tool. I would also like to state that the attorneys were thorough, professional, and ethical.
@@Millerandzois at first I thought Gaston was overly aggressive but Ive grown to LOVE his style after learning who he was being so aggressive with! If I ever need an attorney I sure hope he can practice in Texas! :)
What burns my butt is, most cases don't go to trial, there are too many settled out of court with a nondisclosure or confidentiality agreement. The public does not know about the complaint filings if there is no light shed on the offender.
what pissed me off when your life is saved by a doctor, it is their job . but when something out of ordinary happens , you will sue their ass off . Karma will get you
Sounds to me that the patient went home with a knee immobilizer, experienced swelling and didn't loosen the brace. This would cut off circulation. It appears that the complication happened after discharge from the ER.
I am NoT a physician. I FAILED all my high school science classes and even I got that mioglobin measurement is based on trends upwards as opposed to total numbers because numbers are relative. This man must have smoked something before attending. I'm ready to flip a desk if the attorney asks about a baseline mioglobin level one more time....😑😭😖
The lawyers darn well know how the body works with regard to the parts the subject of the lawsuit. They will have the expert witness go over it so jury is taught and to see if the witness says something different than expected
@Highly Offensive - I worked in medical for 10+ years and in that time did 5 depositions. Lawyers are the absolute worst. I HATE them. All of them! Without exception.
Unfortunately, because the lawyers aren't qualified to state how the human body works, and it can't be assumed the jury knows how the body works, the lawyer is forced to have to expert witness state what would otherwise be considered the dumbest stuff lol
Very intelligent, well spoken, and did a great job rendering expert opinion. This lawyer trying to make him say opposite of what his opinion is really got annoying. Ugh. Good job doctor.
Why do law companies not use lawyers with specialities in certain professions such as medicine. The person questioning the witness did not seem to understand the complexities of medicine. It was also the same when the other professionals were questioned.
What's funny about that is I thought the lawyer who represented the hospital dropped the ball a few times. Out of everyone there you would think the hospital would not only have the funds to hire a professional malpractice lawyer but a good one. I could be biased though because I'm also a nurse and the same lawyer represented her and did a piss poor job of doing it. She couldn't order images and the patient told the PA everything he had told her. I'm assuming she didn't have the money to be represented so the hospital had their lawyer defend her. We actually kept up with the case because it's rare to see a nurse listed as a defendant in something like this. They dropped her off after it became apparent the hospital wouldn't settle. I'm guessing they too knew that would be a hard sell for the jury.
Considering the man lost his leg I am glad that he won the money.. but listening to all the depositions it honestly doesn’t seem that it resulted from negligence among the hospital staff
There's something very wrong with being glad a hospital had to pay $5.2 million for something you don't believe they were responsible for. Let's hope the jury got it right, however the idea that a patient's injury and everything that stems from it becomes the responsibility of the last care provider who treated them is a ruinous philosophy.
I’m confused as to how the poor man who lost his leg won if his medical charts were correct. Unless they were all lying about their assessments then how could they be help responsible? I think that the symptoms that would have caused for further assessments and happened after he had been discharged.
@@kristiediaz1 Well the jury disagreed. Understand that you are only listening to the deposition of the defense expert witness. The complainant's expert would have said the opposite and it was up to the jury to decide which one was more credible. The complainant's lawyers uploaded this seemingly quite proud of their efforts. Every medical malpractice lawsuit is going to have disagreeing experts paid by each side and the defendant practitioners themselves.
to properly assess by means of any and all tests available. lack of reading or listening to the EMT report verbally lead to this man's loss of limb. the assessment should've included a request for the Ortho and or Vascular surgeons. A doppler series is not invasive. ER Dr did none of those. Nor the PA. this man would've been better off calling an ambulance to a real ER
Mr. T told the Er staff a gate fell on his knee, now the EMT report indicates he fell on the knee and twisted it...which is the truth of the mechanics of the injury ? Big difference guys. I think the patient is a liar.
Intersting....wondered how the door feel on knee, he would have been laying down, otherwise the door would just of hit the standing man's knee, but in that case it would have hit his nose first....or his head for that matter. Lol
NOTE: From discharge from the hospital, you are assuming the groceries were not dropped. That is to say, just like someone going back to the grocery store, claiming the eggs he bought (and accidentally broke when he took them into his house, and dropped) were already broken in the store, and want his money back ---- who is it to say, that the patient, having been discharged from the hospital with his leg bandaged, did not fall and/or somehow compromise his leg by his own negligence, and ignore the consequences, and then later, upon realizing his leg had gotten worse, then went back to the hospital and then blamed the doctors/hospital for his leg (eg, circulation damage, ischemia, muscle death, etc)? There is a question that NEVER GETS ASKED. And I venture, that this kind of "patient self-damage" does happen, but it's always the hospital/doctors who get blamed. Just wanted to put that out there.
IMO the medical staff/hospital made a very big mistake. They did not full document everything they did and hear from the patient from questions asked. This leaves the hospital open to law suits because if it is not documented it didn't happen. It doesn't matter what these doctors say under oath. How can these doctors remember every detail of every patient if the are not making notes in the medical chart? It doesn't matter how good/great the hospital/staffs reputation is because after something catastrophic happens if you can't prove it by documentation then they are no longer good/great. They are either money grubbers ( wanting patients in and out fast so they can get more patients in the door) or just out and out lazy.
The attorney is determined to show that Mr Tolsone’s circulation was severely compromised at the time of discharge. The doctor keeps reanswering the same question . Either he doesn’t understand the medical process being explained or is determined to keep on until he gets the answer he wants, which is total absence of circulation of the foot. The medical record clearly indicates the man had circulation with pedal pulses taken by three different medical people, upon discharge. I feel the question. Is when did he loose the circulation and why? I think they are trying to prove is he would have kept his leg, if surgery had be done right away. I think they should sue HIS Insurance company, who was PROBABLY DICTATING WHAT COULD BE DONE AND WHEN.
This particular hospital killed my mother through lack of proper evaluation prior to treatment. Doctors were callous after damage was done and billing was grossly inaccurate with attempt to double bill over $100K after death of my mom. They billed the insurance then billed my father after insurance paid. Fraud on top of greed. Johns Hopkins was disgraceful in every way. And the medical failure was a rather basic one that was 'missed' by them. The reputation of this particular hospital is, in my book, rather over-blown. I did not sue out of respect for my already upset father. My mom used to say that doctors killed their mistakes. Now I know what she meant.
So sorry to hear all you had to go through after losing your mother. There is no compassion when it comes to people wanting money. Greed is the driving force in this country.
This doctor did an amazing job of being calm under pressure and knowing both this case and the actual functions required to attain such an. Injury. so much time was spent throwing hypothetical questions that it became very obvious the attorney was. Grasping at straws to get the doctor to give him a Y ES..in some made up cirscumstance that quite frankly showed HIS LACK OF UNDERSTANDING of the very injury that DROVE. The case to begin with .however wonderful calm under pressure and what an educated and prepared doctor we got to witness today.
After hearing more of the facts I'm surprised the jury ruled as they did. Early on no one said anything about his weight or that he entered ER walking without his brace. But several did state he had positive pedal pulses which meant he had intact artery at first ER visit.
One thing that I have not read anywhere in anyone's comments(or I missed it) is that fact that Insurance companies have their own guidelines for standard of care, which medical care providers will be compensated for...running tests/exams/care outside these guidelines and hospitals run risk of having to eat these costs. Does anyone wonder how the physician assistant roles and nurse practioner roles came about? I believe it didn't exist 40 years ago, 30 years ago just starting to be used, 20 years ago more common, 10 yrs to present, used everywhere. It doesn't appear, from not seeing ANY chart or evidence from case, that EMT & TRIAGE have the same information. Work injury should have ALL the details proceeding to the injury...the doctor only understanding was a gate closed on him, like door... Also what was the discharge instructions? This doc says they there is no way for him to tell when the ischemia occured and there could have been an secondary injury after the patient was discharged.
Seems like a bad idea for a lawyer with no, and i mean zero, not even basic medical knowledge to be conducting a deposition of an expert medical witness. Not only does he fail to accept an answer to question, but not knowing what acute means is just bad form. And then on top of that, raising a hypothetical that requires the removal of facts of the case, no foundation, relevance, disregards facts IN evidence, asked and answered.
As a smoker with no injuries, my feet are usually cool or cold to the touch when I'm sitting around doing nothing in winter.. my inexperienced opinion is no% loss other than natural decline with age and a smoking habit. ...
I have seen so much horrific neglect and abuse in NYC hospitals (and their NYC Medicare/Medicaid OUT-OF-STATE nursing homes and nearby hospitals at those facilities); cold hearted and unqualified nurses and doctors..they all face God Almighty on JUDGMENT DAY for such horrible behavior...leading some patients to their DEATH.
This is the second video I've seen where the plaintiff's lawyer's incompetence was laid out for all to see. They failed to list documents this doctor was requested to bring to the deposition. That's like calling in a ditchdigger to dig a giant hole and failing to require him to bring a shovel.
My sister dislocated her knee many, many times and it just did while walking. Walking .. nit some force, not an athlete, high energy. She would walk and it would dislocate after years of this happening she finally had surgery. He once again gives his expert opinion for what best benefits himself.
"The case was not wildly defensible." Is that true? I felt like the testimony by both vascular surgery experts regarding the myoglobin levels being completely inconsistent with the ischemia originating during the original ER visit were very compelling.
The lawyer doing the direct examination is redundant, confused, and does not have any direction. He was not listening to Dr. Black's answers but was probably thinking of what question to ask next, hence, the the repetitive and even irrelevant questions.
The Dr's lawyer should have been shutting down this plaintiff lawyer. As you said, he kept trying to create a narrative counter to the testimony given. A good lawyer would have objected to the redundant questions.
Yeah, that's how it goes. A witness may say something that answers later questions, but lawyers have a question outline and stick to it for a reason. It's a fact finding exercise. Narrative and like-ability don't really factor in at depositions.
The fact that these lawyers "turned down a nearly $1 million offer to settle the case" has no bearing whatsoever as to whether or not malpractice occurred. Juries are erratic and insurance companies/hospitals often prefer to settle even ludicrous cases to avoid the unpredictable and often unjust settlements decided by juries. This case literally could have come down to the dude's girlfriend looked like a young Angelina Jolie and the jury consisted of mostly young men.
This just goes to show that this lawyer does not want this Dr. to testify, why, because he makes sense. When a person (such as some one that may sit on a jury) listens and understands answers to a question, the other side surly does not want that to happen. Always get the jury confused so that closing can get the lies across.
Very interesting. Just reinforces my opinion that I'd rather be lucky than smart. Although where the legal system is concerned, the more money you have, the luckier you become. 💰
Oh yes 👍👍 thank you feor the even weekend eeee e wee we e weeeoo week went good good 😊😊 love love 💕💕💕 good good good 😊 thank thank thankw we ya gotta gotta wow 😯 thank you for weopeeeeowe thankfor you for you for today I was was able answer call call 📞 call 📞 please please thank go get your stuff and call 📞 back in the morning
I think this is a PAID expert witness for the patient, therefore his and the patient attorney should get along. No hostility there. He doesn’t seem to be to judgements at this point.
Shame on this plaintifds' attorney for questioning his knowledge and background in such depth! Obviously, this Dr. is very knowledgeable about his profession! Did not have to go to that degree for this case!
Good question, however someone with a greater level of understanding, regarding the linear sequencing of follow-up care, already answered. I on the other hand, injured my shoulder over a year ago, and the referral from my G.P. to Orthopedics, is still out in the medical ether of the referral void. I have been told 4 times now that it has been sent to the wrong Orthopedics department, coupled with a plethora of being told "The Dr. needs to further review your case", there after a couple months, being told that they are the wrong department for my type of injury. Brilliant! I am glad this fellow was able to follow-up within a few days, otherwise they may have amputated both legs and an arm.
Did he follow discharge instructions? With one of the other experts, this lawyer asked about could he have caused more damage if he took the splint/brace off at home, bent his knee, it walked on it without crutches? I'm not an expert, but if you don't follow Dr instructions at home, how can the damage from that be placed on the Dr?!?!
@@christie4044 , there is no way to really measure and verify his in-home after care requirements being appropriately met, other than the plaintiff providing his word. However, it would seem that the damage to the artery was severe enough to inhibit the blood flow to the lower extremity prior to discharge. If all of the avenues of diagnosis were explored in the E.R. the damage would have been identified and the following amputation of his leg would have been negated. This is were the malpractice theory comes into play. It is not a case of advanced aggravation of the injury post discharge and during the three days he remained at home, awaiting his follow-up appointment with his General practitioner. Moreover, it is the Registered Nurse, the Physician's Assistant and the Doctors failure to perform additional diagnostic exams beyond the palpitation of the pedal pulse, in properly diagnosing the severity of the injury. There were three tiers of possable diagnosis, from nurse to doctor. In this case, all three opportunities to perform more invasive diagnostic exams failed, and the patient unduly suffered as a result. This is spacifically why the deposing attorney focused upon procedure, quality of care and the operational oversight of the care providers. The reality is that the plaintiff could not have injured the artery to the point of inhibiting circulation to the point of tissue necrosis and gangrene, unless he hit it with a baseball bat while at home. Yes, it is a fine diversion of the defence to blame the patient and cite three days of non-provider observation and care, as a contributing factor to the advanced severity of the traumatized artery. Yet, one cannot deny the failure of the care team to not perform exams, even as a precautionary measure prior to discharge. Thereby, preventing any further damage that would have been incurred at home, while affording early identification of the injured artery and following through with the nessasary vascular treatment. I hope that helps bring the essence of the malpractice issue into focus and why his after care is inconsequential in comparison to the lack of diagnostic procedure prior to the plaintiffs' discharge from the E.R.
@@luxonlex4453 This Dr says differently, but like I said, I'm not an expert. This Dr says they did just as they should in ER, which is what I thought, and that the blood flow didn't stop until about 36 hours after he left ER that first day. He said he followed instructions, however, when he went in 2 days later, they didn't say he was on crutches (and never mentioned his immobilizer) they said he was walking with a gait basically that showed something was wrong. They wouldn't have seen that gait if he was on crutches. This Dr agreed that there was no vascular issue when he was discharged from ER as he had +2 pulse BL. So his pulse was fine bilateral when he was discharged from ER. If he would've had a vascular blockage or no pulse in ankle at the ER and sent home like that, there would've been more dead tissue when he came back in, but it was still viable. I was just judging my thoughts on experience with my ex-husband who broke his ankle at work. He was type 1&2 diabetic. They put in screws and sent him home with no antibiotics. I kept asking. I kept taking him in to the Dr as it was looking worse and worse. The Dr kept telling me we just needed to soak it in Epsom salt, no antibiotic. When his foot was purple, almost black, I called work comp to tell them I was taking him to ER, they said they couldn't authorize that and do they couldn't say they would pay. I said, if I'm wrong, I will pay. If I'm right, you can thank me that you won't be paying him for the rest of his life when he loses his foot. I brought him in and they did 3 bags of IV antibiotics and then emergency surgery. They had to cut out all the meat on one side of his ankle as it was all dead. Said he would've lost it had I not brought him in. BTW... Work comp then DID pay the ER visit. The point was, this guy's tissue was not dead and it would've been with no blood to it on that first day. So this Dr said they ER nurse, PA, and Dr did as they should have.
8 minutes in and I feel confident predicting that if this is the doctor that was suited the plaintiffs lost this malpractice case. Edit: checked the video description. Well done to this firm because this is a great professional defense witness. I don't think you can ask for a doctor if you're the defending attorney.
Thanks. You have to keep in mind we don't do video depositions of our own witnesses. So you are just seeing one side of the case when you hear these defense experts.
Why does she keep saying objection but he still answers the question. I don't know court's well. But what's the point of objecting and they still answer the question
You cannot use the question at trial if there is a valid objection. So the lawyer preserves the objection if the deposing party wants to you the transcript or video for any purpose at trial.
It wasn't a door that fell on him. After 911, the place Tolson worked installed large metal gates in the floor that would spring up to prevent terrorists from entering the building. Apparently, Mr Tolson stepped into the opening in the ground where this gate was, and his foot was caught. This caused him to have a twisting injury to his knee as he fell. And he was a big guy, 245#. Ouch!
Good question! Because with crush injuries you see a spike in myoglobin and CK. But his injuries he presented to ER didnt reflect a serious enough injury to drawing the labwork to check.
I had a tear in my knee, and had it removed, since I still have pain, I am having a partial replacement. I have good doctors at Glendale Momorial Hospital.
The standard contingency fee is 33% if the case is resolved by settlement and 40% if the case goes to trial. 40% is the highest allowed by law in Maryland and most states have similar laws restricting or capping attorney fee percentages.
I have been watching trials for a while now on RU-vid and I enjoy those. Just recently started watching depositions and I find them interesting. It's kinda like a trial but different too. It's weird to see them object but with no judge to rule on them.
With a medical background, but no legal background I felt the same way when watching these. My best guess would be when they go to trial the defense attorney knows which boundaries to stay within? Not sure though.
@@GingerNinja1litigator here. Objections are made during depositions for a number of reasons. Note that this particular deposition is both a discovery and trial deposition (there was a discussion about the revised notice of deposition at the beginning of the recording). Meaning, much of it will likely be shown to the jury during trial in lieu of the doctor appearing live- doctors love to charge an arm and a leg (hopefully ones with normal blood flow) for imparting all of their wisdom to us dumb lawyers. Likely, the judge will rule on the objections lodged by the lawyers at the pre trial conference or other pretrial motions hearing and, if the objections are sustained, the question and corresponding answer will not be played for the jury. Hope that helps!
To win 5.2 million someone messed up real bad dam everything should be recorded if the person wants it some might not but op is risky might be best as some make mistakes and hide it I would rather be health and no money
If the patient had gotten this doctor he wouldn't have lost his leg. The doctor on call was not competent and did not care. I doubt he fell ... He was probably in excruciating pain and moved as little as possible.
This is the third depo I have watched for this, and I have yet to hear the slightest hint that any medical professional said the person's foot was "cold to the touch." The only thing there is, is the implication that the claimant is asserting it. And holy shit does this lawyer love to say "cold to the touch." He has said it so many times I have to wonder if he has a foot fetish of some kind. He is obsessed with saying the precise words "cold to the touch" like he gets off on it.
How can someone be so accomplished and do so much in the same 24 hours I have each day?? This is the type of dude who would pass away the day after retirement. Lol. Goddamn hustler.
The color of the toenails can be used to help determine pallor in a dark skinned patient. This was a most interesting series of depositions in this case. Imo the plaintiff's attorney did a great job asking questions in such a way that it caused this surgeon to contradict his statements. I would've like to have watched the trial. Thank you for sharing.
I would be so frustrated at having to explain things like ‘viable’ - I know that lawyers are not doctors, but do they have to have everything explained to them!?
I haven't heard any questions as regards a possible history of Diabetis Melitis, especially since the patent was black or whether the patient has had an mRNA injection against Covid 19. These could be significant factors in a case like this.
Maybe look at the time stamp on the video and then also pay attention to the dates mentioned in the video, the actual injury occurred 6 years before the date of this deposition
I hope that someday someone will finally expose the evil practice of drugging children for supposed behavior/focus issues here in America? It seems to me that adults will make up any excuse or reason to justify the drugging of children here in America! I remember the summer before my 6th grade year, moving from the inner city of Indianapolis to a new school in the suburbs. My home life had significantly changed that summer & it wasn't very stable at the time. I flunked that year & got held back. Which I understand why but before the school year ended. I was tested for learning disabilities because the school wanted to put me in a special class. I passed the test with ease. When my mom was contacted by the vice principle. She was pressured to give in to the idea that I should be put in the special class anyways, but she protested the idea. Mainly because I passed the test that they gave me & also because I explained to my mom that I didn't need to be in the special class. Long story short. That next school year my mom was threatened by the school to either have me evaluated for adhd or to remove me from their school. (Which was a public school by the way) I was evaluated & medicated that same week. My whole life changed after being put on drugs & nothing was ever the same. The negative effects that the drugs had on my physical & mental health took effect immediately. My self-esteem became significantly low & I was very embarrassed & fearful by the idea of my peers knowing that I had to be put on prescribed drugs. That was mentally tough, but it was nothing compared to the physical aspect of being legally drugged as a child. Because physically, I felt completely warn out. By the time that school would end each day. I would be absolutely drained. I remember lying to my friends back then about why it was that I needed to go home after school instead of playing ball or whatever. I would say things like, I need to do some chores, or I would make up other types of different reasons why I couldn't go with them to the park. Or why it was that I needed to leave the park after only just arriving there. Eventually my friends would just reply with, " all right Tony, we will see you tomorrow ". It became a joke because they knew that I was not going to commit to my word of making it back. Somedays I would eventually make it & meet back up with them like I said I was going too. But most days, even if I set an alarm, I just couldn't wake up. It became a joke, because my friends from the neighborhood. They knew that I wasn't coming back. They also knew that I wasn't coming back because I was going home to go to sleep. It is crazy to think about now because, It wouldn't even be 5PM & I would be absolutely exhausted. My friends just didn't understand though & so I didn't let them know that I was bothered by being called out. They didn't understand that I actually did want to come back but no matter how hard I would try to just take a short nap. Almost every time instead. What would happen is. I would lay down to just rest & then eventually end up Completely crashed out & asleep in my bed until the very late PM or early AM hours. The drugs that I was made to take as a child completely changed & interrupted my sleeping regiment. I often felt physically weak & ill Back then. No matter how hard I tried. I couldn't gain no weight or exert much energy towards the physical activities that I had loved doing so much prior to being medicated. I became a walking, talking zombie. Like I said in the beginning. My whole life changed & nothing was ever the same after I was legally drugged by the system as a child. ((((Drugged for a disorder that I didn't have.)))) To be honest, I don't even think adhd exists in children until after they get drugged. I say that because after you get drugged. That is when the real problems begin! *Drugging children for supposed behavior/focus issues is A Crime Against Humanity!!!! I'm confidently open to discuss or debate this issue with or against anybody, in front of anyone. I have first-hand personal experience dealing with this & I am very open to the idea of talking about it in a controlled manner*. (This comment has been stored & documented for my own personal future documentary purposes. & also, This comment meets utube's friendly community guidelines. Therefore, it shouldn't be unreasonably censored.) - American Intermediary 5/25/23
@@Chris.4345 Sir nothing, drugging children is a crime against humanity! American Intermediary 9/14/23 (the initial comment & the thread that follows will be saved for future documentary purposes) American Intermediary 9/14/23
Its very possible that this patient had a crush injury several days prior and myoglobin may have been dropping or rising. Without clearly tending it there's pure speculation.
I’m a nurse and I have had so many patients refuse or take off knee immobilizer. The defendant states that he never did, really!! He’s suing for millions, you really think he’s not gone to lie.
All these hypotheticals sound like “what picture to I need to paint to the jury to get paid”. Like, “stop. Stop telling me what reality looks like. Tell me exactly what factors would need to be present for me to get paid” 🤣
Haha, not at all a criticism. I’ve been binge watching these depositions and I’m fascinated from the perspective of both a nurse who’s left the profession because I started to feel as though profits would be put above patient safety no matter what practicing nurses thought or said and also from the perspective of a person who’s generally fascinated by and very observant of human behavior and psychology. From my perspective the attorneys in these depositions are very skilled at communicating in various ways (dependent on the behavior of the interviewed subjects) in eliciting desired responses, making them skilled litigators.
@@Millerandzois Yes, I did notice that. It’s slightly disappointing as I’m now wanting to hear the other side of these stories 😜 I worked and lived in MD for many years and now live about 1/2 mile over the PA border in New Freedom so I’m keeping my fingers crossed that enough time has lapsed that there’s a zero percent chance of you ever deposing me 🤣 but I have no opinion on how these cases should be decided as hearing half of a story doesn’t put me in a position to have such an opinion. Also, maybe I’ll become a paralegal one day and be looking for work 😁
Then you didn't understand her testimony. PA does the exam. MD does the exam and if she concurs with the PAs exam no additional exam notes are made. If the MD finds something the PA missed then it will be noted.
In 2000 my neice was 14 she had cf her lung had collapsed and when they fixed that they give you steroids and it cause her sugar level to get to 1308 they didn't watch it. and it killed her my sister was only give 250.000 because they said her life was limited because of the cf her name was Tiffany Ann we miss her so much after 20 yrs
We have said this elsewhere... St. Agnes is, in our opinion, a pretty good hospital that is blessed not to be as driven by profits as some other institutions. But, yes, there is awful care at every hospital.
It’s interesting to me how much hypothetical this lawyer can throw around fishing for something to grasp onto. Aren’t lawyers supposed to deal with facts of a case? Seems highly unprofessional and badgering honestly.
What is this crap of someone in the background mumbling "objection" to every question and statement? If everything that is said is "objectionable" why bother trying to have a deposition..
1.27.36 oh my gosh I disagree and am sick almost. Dr. In er signs PA and chart 10 days later. Oh my gosh. Do you realize the gross neglegance of this. I am appalled. I hope they get sued for it all. I understand they settled for 1.5 Mil, but I wouldn't have made that deal. I think I'll just be the final authority in all my medical decisions no matter what.
At 0h45mins re "cold to 'the' touch". 1. Who was the person doing the touching? 2. How many times was the "cold" foot assessed and by which people? Was its actual temperature, in degrees C° or F° ever measured? 3. As the v surgeon stated "it's a relative thing".- - If touched by a hand, What was the temperature of the hand that touched the foot? How long was that hand being warmed up in a hot pocket before feeling the foot? 4. The 'Perception of coolness' issue can be subdivided into different specific categories, by: A. The patient feeling the coolness via the nerves connecting the foot to the brain. B. Patient using a hand or his other foot to touch the 'cold' foot. C. Using a measuring instrumemt such as an infrared thermometer to get a reading. D. Another person touching or measuring the temperature. Which of those was it? Was it rechecked? How many times?
The doctor states that the other problem was caused later, that means they did not misdionoised. Why they wacked off his leg, I dont know, was it necessary.? I would do whatever to keep my leg, not let them take it.
Mr. Gaston does suffer from lawyer's repetition syndrome. But had Mairi Pat Maguire let out another sigh during yet another of her objections, I think Mr. Gaston would have been justified in cutting off her air supply. I'm glad Maguire's side lost.
Excellent deposition from the vascular surgeon. The lawyer asking the questions has no clue what he's talking about and is trying to mask his cluelessness with irrelevant repetitive questions and aggressiveness. The attempts to discredit the expert are embarrassing ('Have you passed your Boards on the first attempt?" yeah right :))))
You know, I would think that a person attempting to practice in law would understand that the Doc has answered his question and is not going to be tripped up by this reject off the sinking ship. 47:12 The Doc is too smart to play the hypothesis game with the deposing attorney. My foot feels cold. Oh, you do know that it's 68 degrees or lower in a hospital to help keep bugs from moving, germs from spreading or growing, and a whole host of other reasons so, yeah..... your foot might get cold or cool if uncovered in the ER.
@@TT-bm6qt He is doing a classic collateral attack on this "Pro" expert witness and he takes his smug demeanor and nonsense testimony apart piece by piece. Nothing exceptional except this poor man lost his leg?
