A year ago, we discussed a bizarre case where a colonoscopy patient (identified only as “DB”) is suing over abusive comments made about him by his doctors . . . while he was under anesthesia. “DB” had failed to turn off his cellphone which continued to record comments of the doctors ridiculing him, his body, and his character. While the alleged defamation did not leave the operating room (that is until his lawsuit), he alleged that it was still defamation and Dr. Tiffany Ingham and others for $1.35 million in damages for defamation, infliction of emotional distress and illegally disclosing his health records. Well, after a three-day trial, a Fairfax County jury ordered the anesthesiologist and her practice to pay him $500,000.
On the tape, Dr. Tiffany Ingham is recorded addressing his unconscious body: “And really, after five minutes of talking to you in pre-op I wanted to punch you in the face and man you up a little bit.” She also reportedly called him a “big wimp” and a “retard.” In addition about ridiculing his alma mater of Mary Washington College, she is quoted as saying more menacing things about firing a gun up his rectum and suggesting that they falsely note on his chart that he had hemorrhoids.
The staff is portrayed as exhibiting all of the decorum and professionalism of an Animal House fraternity with Ingham as the resident Bluto. Some members reportedly jokes about a rash on DB’s penis and how he looks like he has syphilis. Ingham, who comes off particularly badly, is quoted as saying “It’s probably tuberculosis in the penis, so you’ll be all right.” They all discussed avoiding DB after the surgery. As discussed earlier, defamation does not require contemporary knowledge and indeed it is often discovered later by the victim. Moreover, it only requires publication to other individuals, not widespread disclosure or publication.
The jury appears to have rejected any argument that this was merely juvenile humor or even opinion. Clearly they are expressing their opinion as to his being a “wimp” or “retard.” Dr. Ingham, 42, could not be reached for comment and she no longer appears to work out of the Aisthesis anesthesia practice in Bethesda, Md. State licensing records indicate she has moved to Florida. The gastroenterologist who performed the colonoscopy, Soloman Shah, 48, was dismissed from the case, but he is shown engaging in the juvenile comments.
The jury awarded the man $100,000 for defamation — $50,000 each for the comments about the man having syphilis and tuberculosis — and $200,000 for medical malpractice, as well as the $200,000 in punitive damages.
Patients hear and feel what happens in surgery. That’s why they are given drugs that induce amnesia so that they don’t remember what they heard and felt. Think of how much a paper cut hurts – imagine the pain you have, but don’t remember, when they take a scalpel or a saw and cut through skin, fat, muscle, or bone. Hooray for drugs!
Glad this doctor got slammed. She’s a toad.
Professor Turley’s lecture hall.
Video/Electronic/Digital records should be created and available for subpoena in every situation where it is
possible. It is after all, the Year of Our Lord, 2015. Audio/Video recordings of:
Operating Rooms
Airline Cockpits
Air Traffic Control
The Supreme Court
Obamacare Development Room
Oval Office
Secretary of State (Oops, Hillary criminally destroyed that record/evidence, she learned well from Nixon).
ABC, CBS, NBC
Rush Limbaugh (Oops, he already generates a record)
Restaurant Kitchens
Etc.
With, not will full knowledge.
@Porkchop
Anesthesiologists, and just how crucial a part they play in operations, are often overlooked by the public, in general, since most don’t appreciate the tragedies which occur at the hands of incompetent ones. Again, a patient, will full knowledge and info as to the background of this woman, would have the opportunity to opt out of her services, choosing instead to go with an anesthesiologist missing her checkered past.
Hmmm. Sooo we have a female doctor, and what appears to be an sissified little male patient, and she makes some remarks on his wimpiness. While he is sedated and can’t hear it. Oh, whatever happened to free speech! Not to mention her inalienable right to just be a b*tch! This is a blow against professional women everywhere! She was right he needs to “man up”, but he is such a little weenie that he can’t — so he lawyer’s up instead! Oh this needs an Irish Poem!
Snide Whiplash???
An Irish Poem by Squeeky Fromm
There once was a wimp, upside down,
Exposed in a hospital gown!
And the doctor, with sass,
Says “My God, what an A$$!
And he sued her, that sorry a$$-clown!
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
FWIW, the Urban Dictionary defines “A$$ Clown” as
a$$ clown (ás kloun) n.:
one, who, through the fault of his parents conception, is a skid mark in society’s collective underwear.
@ bam bam
She’s an anesthesiologist. Patients don’t usually pick them — they just show up at the operating room as part of the support team for physician who is going to be performing the actual procedure. Nor do anesthesiologists normally pick their patients; they work for larger medical practices that contract to provide anesthesia services to hospitals and outpatient facilities.
In this case, DB showed up for his outpatient colonoscopy, and Dr. Ingham came to see him briefly before the colonoscopy to discuss his medical history. Based on that brief conversation and an inquiry about the only medication he took, she apparently took an instant dislike to him. The rest is history.
I can’t help but wonder why, if the person was so repulsive and disgusting to this physician, would she agree to take him on as a patient? Doctors, along with attorneys, frequently choose not to take on various patients or clients, for a variety of reasons.
So, now, we have this physician, packing up her practice and moving to Florida. How are her prospective patients to know about her exploits in Virginia? Should the burden be placed upon some unsuspecting senior, who probably still has a rotary phone, to seek out this lawsuit in Virginia? Again, at the risk of sounding repetitive, there needs to be a single, easily accessible website, which, by law, must include any and all complaints filed against physicians with their respective medical boards, including any and all lawsuits filed against these doctors throughout the country. Let the consumer have the ability to make an informed choice. That informed choice shouldn’t require having a background in being a private investigator. How is the average guy to know that this physician once practiced in Virginia and was named as the defendant in this type of lawsuit? The medical establishment makes full disclosure, concerning a physician’s past misdeeds, difficult, if not impossible, to obtain. Want reform in the field of medicine? This would be a great place to start. Unfortunately, with consumers having less and less choice, with regard to their medical treatment and the physicians dispensing those services, the reform may come too late.
Precisely HIPAA is designed to protect the patient’s right to privacy, not the doctor’s. And it’s not HIPPA, it’s HIPAA.
bam bam – I agree that consumers should be able to look up any complaints against their doctor from any medical board without having to go from website to website, or guess which state he or she might have practiced in previously.
And it should be noted that my husband was prohibited from filming my own C-Section. Obviously, there were no other patients in the operating suite. It was for liability.
The only part I wanted filmed was my baby’s first cry, but we were not allowed.
Doctors do not want patients to record their own procedures or discussions because of liability, not HIPPA, because they won’t allow it to be recorded even if no other patient is in the room. That’s the same reason why they do not want family members present during a procedure. Malpractice law suits are expensive, and the proliferation of frivolous lawsuits has driving malpractice insurance up considerably. Obviously, the above example is a valid suit.
There is security to deal with violent patients or family. No medical professional should be physically assaulted. That does not mean that a patient should be alone, either. It is psychologically beneficial, and can possibly create a better outcome for the patient.
As a case in point, my relative’s husband always accompanied her for her procures, at the very least being there in recovery the moment she awakened. So when it was time for his own cataract surgery, he decided he’d let her stay with him. He was so relaxed, joking around with the doctor, that it made quite an impression. So much so, that when his next patient had a problem, he tried something new. That next patient was Korean, and English was his second language. Every time they’d try to begin, his blood pressure and heart rate would skyrocket. So the doctor asked if one of his family would like to sit with him and hold his hand. His daughter, American born and completely fluent in English, sat with him, the patient relaxed noticeably, and he was able to complete the procedure.
These anecdotal examples lead me to believe we should study the effects that having family present in certain instances can have on patient outcomes. I think this is something that we should explore.
Why do we now allow husbands to be present during their wife’s delivery, even by C-Section? Because it’s better for the patient and she wants him there. So why not be present during other procedures, at least those when the patient is conscious?
@Kathy Jones
I don’t have any experience with HIPPA, but my understanding is that the law is designed to protect the _patient’s_ privacy. I don’t see how the patient can violate his own privacy interests by recording a medical visit on his own phone.
Aside from the monetary damages awarded the patient, which I assume may have been picked up by their insurance carrier, what consequences did these doctors face? Ingham, at 42 years of age, has simply packed up her practice and moved to Florida, where she will, undoubtedly, practice for another 20 years or so. No repercussions and no way for future patients to be forewarned about her lack of professionalism and decency. Anything on file with the state medical board? The onus is on the patient, unfortunately, to ferret out any lawsuits or complaints against these doctors, which is not an easy task, given the ease with which these doctors can skip around the country and set up shop. There should be an easier method for potential patients to obtain access to any and all lawsuits in which doctors are named as defendants in the US or abroad. The same applies to accessing any and all complaints filed against physicians to various medical boards. This shouldn’t be an arduous task for the consumer. One site should contain all relevant information. The same ease of accessing information should apply to acquiring facts regarding complaints or lawsuits filed against attorneys in this country.
bam bam – you can bet her medical malpractice has gone up regardless of where she is practicing.
As a wife of a doctor, he is daily challenged (some in very threatening manner) when asking patients (and family who attend the visit) to turn off their phones and put them away. HIPPA laws are made to protect, and recording/video/pictures are not allowed and signs are posted to that end. What is the provider to do to not only protect the patient, but also themselves? Many patients (family) refuse. Could/should a doc refuse to treat unless this is done? Who is there to protect the provider from a violent patient or family member?
@ Michael Scott
Dr. Ingham stated that DB had syphilis and that DB had tubeculosis. Both were statements of fact, not opinion. Both statements were false. She knew the statements were false. Both statements were defamation per se, thus requiring no specific proof of loss — damages are presumed in cases of defamation per se.
What is of concern to me is that hospitals do not permit family to witness procedures, even when there is a viewing area, or be present in recovery. They cite HIPPA. The patient has neither a witness nor an advocate when they are helpless to ensure they are taken care of.
Someone in my family had such a bad experience with a doctor that she now has anxiety unless her husband is present in recovery, and in the early days, in the operating room itself. It was like moving mountains, but he got the permission to be present. She couldn’t get the procedure done, otherwise. So the betrayal by a doctor can have very serious consequences.
I think that the award is in part a feeling of the jurors that someday they also may be in the same position (so to speak) and don’t want to have to worry that this could happen to them.
When you are in surgery, under anesthesia, you are totally helpless and at the mercy of those who are in the operating room. You want to know that they are acting in a professional manner and taking the best care of your unconscious body as they can. Not making jokes at your expense. Not acting like adolescents and horsing around when they are supposed to be concentrating on your procedure.
I believe that this is a message from the jury. And it is a good one.
Porkchop – thanks for the additional information. I hope cancer was ruled out, although there would be concerns that the medical staff were so busy joking perhaps they were not thorough in their examination and might have missed something.
We are at our most helpless and vulnerable while sedated during a medical procedure. I have heard about this before – doctors and nurses joking about the patient while he or she is under, or amongst themselves after the procedure is over, although never to that extent. This is such a shocking betrayal of the trust placed with them, such unprofessional behavior. And this can have very real consequences to DBs medical future, if he’s lost confidence in doctors and his health suffers.
Most of us would be devastated to hear trusted doctors talk about us like that while we were helpless.
Best wishes for DB, and good for him for standing up for himself.
The new True Detective looks promising.