NY jury rejects rectal exam lawsuit : RSS 0.91http://www.plime.com/law/en-usNY jury rejects rectal exam lawsuit : RSS 0.91http://www.plime.com/law/<![CDATA[NY jury rejects rectal exam lawsuit]]>http://www.plime.com/plime-com/l/59271/1/story about a man being given a rectal exam against his wishes. A jury decided that the medical professionals did nothing wrong by giving him what they felt was needed medical testing.]]>
  comments (6)  share edit history (0)
< 1 >
<![CDATA[ImNotBlue @ 4/22/2008 3:51:53 PM]]>http://www.plime.com/law/l/59271/1/rss0_91.rss#q7http://www.webmd.com/prostate-cancer/guide/cystoscopy)... but I'm back to work today!

With all that in mind, I'm pretty qualified to talk about the "mental" effects.

A rectal exam is uncomfortable, degrading, and over all unpleasant... but it is nothing to fear or build a lawsuit around. After the first one, I did spend a few days where the thought of it would make me cringe, but that goes away after a while.

IMO, this guy needs to man up, and touch his toes. There's a lot worse that could happen.]]><![CDATA[2manyusernames @ 4/22/2008 11:38:42 AM]]>http://www.plime.com/law/l/59271/1/rss0_91.rss#q6« Nicky666 :
« MeMe :
Click on the original link for the discussion on this issue.

basically there is the issue is whether he was reasonable and competent at the time, the emergency of the situation as determined by the doctors, the liability of the doctors/hospital not to give him full and best medical care despite his statement which may or may not have been said rationally. It isn't quite open and shut that the patient gets final say in all situations especially when there is no against medical advice form filled out and notarized.]]><![CDATA[MeMe @ 4/22/2008 11:33:56 AM]]>http://www.plime.com/law/l/59271/1/rss0_91.rss#q5
*edit*
Nicky and I must have been writing our responses at the same time...]]><![CDATA[Nicky666 @ 4/22/2008 11:33:31 AM]]>http://www.plime.com/law/l/59271/1/rss0_91.rss#q4I'd like to learn more about this, because the information in the article makes me think....that jury was terribly wrong.

He was concious, and he didn't want a rectal exam.

Ofcourse it's stupid to turn that down if the docs say your spine might be damaged, but they should've let him sign a form which takes the blame off of them in case there actually is spinal damage, and the guy hurts himself even more due to his "anal fears".
(Or they could've...I don't know...talk to him and calm him down a little that way?!)

The only reason to let the docs of the hook, is if they had reason to believe the blow to his head was hard enough to impair his judgement.]]><![CDATA[2manyusernames @ 4/22/2008 10:51:39 AM]]>http://www.plime.com/law/l/59271/1/rss0_91.rss#q3« larknet : And that, of course, is the fault of getting a rectal exam. The fact that he has been unemployed since the accident is irrelevant to this case.Yes, he deliberately didn't take a job so as to make his case stronger - or so he thought]]><![CDATA[larknet @ 4/22/2008 10:46:59 AM]]>http://www.plime.com/law/l/59271/1/rss0_91.rss#q2DeFilippo said his client is unemployed and has been unable to hold a job since the accident.And that, of course, is the fault of getting a rectal exam. The fact that he has been unemployed since the accident is irrelevant to this case.]]>