ok..so my 8 year old gashed her leg open and got staples put in it at the emergency room..
i took her to the doc today to get them taken out and the doc told me that they shouldve sewn it cuz it will leave a nasty scar...
when she was at the emergency room the doctor there told me it would be easier on her cuz staples are quicker..when i asked about scarring they told me it would scar but not any worse than stitches..but i have no proof of that statement
i am beginning to feel like they just wanted to rush her out cuz i have no insurance on her
to me a scar like that may be something that will affect her mentally in the future
this is not about why i have no insurance..i make too much money for gov assistance...but not enough for insurance
and im not giving her hang ups about it..so thats not an issue either
i am only considering het thoughts she may have in the future
this question is only about the legal aspect of malpractice
BIG-G
sorry to hear that! my opinion is that even so called non-profit hospitals rush or don't even treat people with no insurance even though it is against the law.
i am far from a lawyer, but it sounds ridiculous that they would say staples would leave less of a scar.
peace!
Ashlea C
As unfortunate as it is, it is not malpractice. Look into treatments that could take the scars away but you should really wait a little while to see how they look they might be minimal since she is so young and her skin and bones...everything really is still growing. Children heal so fast. Good luck with everything and I'm sure she will look fine
hillarystarbright
Well, first of all, you don't know which doctor is right, and you don't know if either stitches or staples (or both, or neither) will leave a scar. For all you know, the ER doctor was right and the staples won't do any worse than stitches would have. You would have to prove in court that the doctor was negligent in treating your daughter, and it doesn't look like you can prove that he did anything wrong.
Also, it's not generally considered medical malpractice when you heal someone and a scar is left behind -- if they caused the gash in her leg, then maybe, but what you described isn't the legal definition of medical malpractice.
Ribbons
No, that wouldn't be malpractice. Malpractice usually has to involve something that either kills or seriously injures or leaves a person debilitated. Unfortunately, doctors can get away with a lot.
ohGr
I wouldn't say it's malpractice because it did it's job. If they had screwed up the proceedure that would be different. I don't know what recourse, if any, that you would have about his opinion that staples don't scar any more than stitches, because that's what that would be considered..his medical opinion.
remoserjr107
Not Exactly, the work had to be done right then, be happy They did a good job....!!
Orignal From: Tips: is this considered medical malpractice...?
Post a Comment