Surgeon has refused to operate on litigious patient

[justasking111]

Long story, friends OH had hip op. all went wrong afterwards infection set in was in hospital three months on iv antibiotics, when home had antibiotics, further surgery needed. Fast forward a few months surgeon has refused to do a further op. because my friend an expert HR person had logged each call, e mail so thoroughly with the hospital admin. and surgeon challenging them when they bull shitted, that the result is he is on morphine which the surgeon will not prescribe will have to go to GP. Now patient is in his fifties not elderly with no prospect of any kind of care. He is going to die isn`t he.

My question is is it reasonable if you question the medical system is it ok to just be kicked to the curb.

AIBU he should be kicked to the kerb
YANBU he should get the op.

A friend of mine had spinal surgery (privately) got a bad infection from the surgery. Because of the infection had to have more surgery which he had to pay for again.....he tried to argue he shouldn’t have to pay but the hospital said infection is a risk of any surgery and could have been contracted post op at home.

No way to prove it was done in surgery. He consulted a medical negligence solicitor who agreed and refused to take the case on.

Every surgery has a risk of infection, he agreed to that risk when he gave consent for surgery.

Does he still have infection? I had my appendix out a few years ago, the wound opened up and became infected. As a result I was on antibiotics a long time and the wound was allowed to close naturally with clear pack dressings.

I then needed

If he has an infected open wound, why is he showing it to all and sundry? He's either making the infection worse or risking doing so. And if the would is as badly infected as you're telling us, operating on it (unless it's to remove infected tissue) will risk a huge escalation in the infection.

An infected wound is unfortunately something that happens after surgery and isn't the sign of a botched op. But as your friend is so keen on flashing his would to people, did he do the same in hospital and that's how it got infected?

And he can be the world's leading authority on 'HR matters' but that doesn't mean he has a shred of knowledge of medical matters. And judging by your garbled account of the situation, neither have you.

This is a garbled half story. I don't think the surgeon refused surgery to your friend keeping a log of communications. If he has a serious ongoing infection (a risk he will have be warned about before surgery) then it would be inappropriate to operate just now.
It's also entirely normal for him to get his ongoing pain relief from his GP.

Btw, why do you describe him as “litigious” and then say he hasn’t sued anyone? If he hasn’t sued anyone he isn’t litigious?

People do get infections it is not usually the surgeons fault. Patients with diabetes, obesity or poor immunity are more susceptible. Even following all precautions some patients, even healthy ones will get infections. If the surgeons infection rate was terrible he would have been investigated. You can do the same procedure exactly the same and two people can have different outcomes.

"the result is he is on morphine which the surgeon will not prescribe will have to go to GP"

...this is normal. A surgeon wouldn't prescribe morphine for a patient they operated on over a year ago, that's the GPs job.

"The call logging, e mails only started after the operation went wrong and he spent three months in a hospital on an iv. It was the follow up care that was logged. 57 is no age for all this to go so spectacularly wrong, to see a fit man reduced to an invalid who is now refused further surgery is heartbreaking. It is not the same surgeon but it is the same health board."

"No-one has been sued but there has been a cover up. Our health board has form for this."

...then why on earth would your friend want to have care from the same place?!

Sage need to recruit some HR experts given they seem to have magic, multi-disciplinary powers. Need to sack medical doctors as they are evil. and incompetent. and other bad things.

You refer to him as a 'litigious patient'. In my 'US legal system brain' someone is referred to as 'litigous' because they have a history of filing lawsuits. Not simply malpractice, but sues a lot of people in general. Does he have such a history?

Here a doctor can and will refuse to treat someone for pretty much any reason. Just the same as a plumber or music teacher can turn away a client. Obviously not race, religion, etc. Also they can't refuse life-saving treatment, such as in an ER or a cardiac arrest in a hospital setting).

I agree with an above poster who asks why your friend would even want to go back if he believes the surgeon is incompetent or careless. I'd seek treatment and/or a 2nd opinion about his current suitability for surgical correction elsewhere.

This is very garbled. Revision surgery will not be performed if there is an ongoing infection, infections can happen after all manner of procedures (which he will have discussed and signed a document acknowledging this), GPs prescribe long term pain relief and I highly doubt your friend working in HR has influenced the decision one iota.
What has actually "gone wrong"?
Is he under a TVN? Treatment rooms/DNs for wound care? Or have they decided to treat the wound themselves?

None of this makes any sense. He contracted an infection after the surgery. That is awful but is always a risk of any surgery - why does he think there was a cover up or malpractice?

If he believes there is a huge cover up and general incompetence why on earth is he pusuing further treatment there?

It sounds like they cant operate yet because he has such a bad infection. Can he ask to be moved to a different hospital/health authority or to have a second opinion/review?

Would your title be more sensibly phrased as 'patient with detail-focused / antagonistically-minded wife has an unfortunate infection, which is delaying further surgery'?

If the doctor-patient relationship has broken down NHS clinicians can refuse to provide further care.
In my hospital we would refer you on to a neighbouring institution.
This happens very very rarely.

Orthopaedic surgeons refusing to operate when there was ongoing infection - good practice and very very common.

As others have said infection = recognised complication of surgery. May not be negligent just bad luck. If patient unable to accept this it would in all likelihood exacerbate break down in dr-pt relationship.

Is he still on antibiotics ?
Who is looking after the wound ? when was the last time he saw a specialist tissue viability nurse ?
Has he been told he can never have surgery ever , or is it a case of he cannot have surgery at the moment due to the wound / infection ?
When was the last time he had any sort of scan of the hip ?
The surgeon won't prescribe morphine, they might for the initial discharge, but he really does need to speak to the GP about his pain now.
He has had a tough time hasn't he, poor bloke.

I would say there is a whole lot you are not aware of which as it is not you directly involved with makes sense that you don't know it all

It is difficult without all the facts, but either surgery is perceived to cause more harm or your friend was threatening them with legal action and this is the result. No way could anyone blame a surgeon for turning down a patient who is hell bent on destroying their career.

I have made a claim to nhs for botched surgery and won never realised it would affect me getting any other treatment and I had to have an op to put first one right and treatment all done on the nhs
I was in two minds of suing but i missed 9 months of work instead of 6 due to a mistake , had to travel to a hospital over an hr away numerous times , missed a family holiday , but mine was an error from surgeon and shouldn't of happened and hopefully lessons were learnt so it didn't happen to another , so its not all suing to make money sometimes to recover costs
That being said complications that can't be helped ,can't be helped

Instead of 6 weeks

He sounds like a poor surgical candidate at present. That may or may not be someone's fault, but even if so that would be unrelated to the decision not to operate at this time. I feel from your posts that you either don't have the whole story or don't understand it. Your friend might benefit from having an advocate to help him get to the bottom of what is planned and what needs to happen before his treatment can begin. I don't know anything about the health board system in Wales but is that something that could be arranged?

Break down in patient/doctor relationship is a reason for a doctor to refuse to treat a patient, but they should refer on to another specialist and another health board if necessary.
I would contact PALS / patient Liason service but It’s likely there’s another reason the operation isn’t going ahead rather than healthboard refusing

OP, I feel bad for you, your friend and his wife because I've been in the state of mind you're probably been in and it isn't pleasant. It is entirely normal when something goes wrong medically to be scared and hurting and want to hit out. And sometimes that can be compounded if the doctor/surgeon hasn't got the best personal skills and you haven't understood the explanation.

None of which means you are necessarily right. But it does make your actions understandable.

Tell your friend to talk to PALS. They may be able to help if he is right or explain what is actually going on if he isn't.

Aaaand the OP disappears.

What a load of nonsense.

Constant, chronic unremitting infection is sadly a recognised if rare side effect of surgery. It does happen and doesn't mean the surgeon did anything wrong (more likely ward care, hypersensitive immune system, allergy to the prosthetic etc) or that there's been any cover up.

It wouldn't be normal for the surgeon to prescribe long term morphine. That is for a GP.

Has your friend contacted the Ombudsman?