Lawyers, back off!

I was on a patient chat room the other day and a fellow patient mentioned a friend who had had a operation called the "liberation procedure".  The patient in question had multiple sclerosis (MS), and as CIDP and MS are quite similar (both demylenating and auto immune) my interest had been peaked so I did some more research.

Unfortunately, I have to admit that I don't think that the liberation procedure would be suitable for CIDP patients as it is supposed to relieve pressure on the brain stem by widening the veins in the neck.  The demylenation in CIDP patients is in the peripheral nerves.

But I was astounded by some of the things I read.  But before I tell you what let me give you a little background.  The liberation procedure is basically angioplasty in the veins in the neck.  It is a common procedure to treat other vascular problems.  It is considered relatively safe.

Yet, in many western hospitals the procedure is being disallowed.  Why? you may ask.  Because the evidence points to the procedure not working?  Or maybe there are not enough doctors trained in the procedure?  How about the hospitals are ill-equipped to perform such an operation?

All reasonable answers, but all wrong.  The real reason is because of the lawyers protecting hospitals and doctors from litigation.  And what do lawyers know about medicine?  Nothing.  What do they know about treating sick people? Nothing.  And what do they know about being sick?  Nothing.  And no.  That common cold you thought was the mother of all cases of swine flu doesn't count.

MS is a debilitating, degenerative and eventually fatal disease.  Let me try and paint a picture for you.  You live in a wheel chair, you cannot feed or bathe yourself.  You can't even wipe your own bum, and you are only going to get worse until you die.

But there is hope.  You hear of a procedure that has the potential to halt the progress of your disease, maybe even reverse it.  You even find a qualified doctor prepared to do the procedure for you.  But wait. There is a problem.  Because a lawyer is scared of the hospital being sued he puts a stop to the operation.  You, as the patient are now condemned to a life of disability, and your one hope of wrestling back some form of independence and quality of life has been squashed by a lawyer.

If lawyers are scared of being sued for malfeasance, maybe as patients we should sue them for nonfeasance.  If failure to act when you have the means and capability to do so leads to someone having a substantial decrease in their quality of life, surely they should have a right to seek reparations?

As a patient I think I should have the right to decide my own destiny and choose my own treatment options.  I take the risks and if something goes wrong, I pay the price.  I am of sound mind, and I can make my own decisions.  I don't need someone to do it for me.  Especially someone with no idea.  Lawyers, back off!  Until next time, stay well:)