Jun112006
California Authorities Rule on Malpractice Case
Sunday, June 11, 2006 at 10:04PM The office of California's Attorney General has advised the father of a young woman who died shortly after giving birth to her first child that the evidence is insufficient to warrant legal action against the two physicians accused of screwing up. I wrote about the case of Veronica Glaubach last March 22, and updated the entry April 8.
In a three-page letter dated May 16, 2006, to Roberto Glaubach, Veronica's father, the Supervising Deputy Attorny General, Robert McKim Bell, says that three medical experts reviewed the case, and provided independent analyses of treatment provided to Veronica. Bell also says he spoke with the original investigator of the Medical Board of California, and her supervisor. The letter gives the impression of a public offiicial trying to do a careful job, saying "no expense or resources were spared in investigating the treatment and care rendered to Veronica."
But the key sentence explaining why the attorney general's office can't or won't go after the two doctors who treated Veronica is...well, bizarre might be the best description. Consider: "While the experts criticized some aspects of the treatment rendered by these physicians, they all concluded that any departures from the standard of care rose to the level of so-called 'simple departures'--which is to say ordinary negligence--not the severe misbehavior upon which the Board is legally authorized to act."
So if I understand this correctly, "ordinary negligence"--whatever that is--is okay. What is the difference between "ordinary negligence" and "severe misbehavior"? You've got me. But next time I visit a physician, maybe I'll give caution him: "If you screw up with anything, doc, I just want it to be ordinary negligence. Don't pull any severe misbehavior on me."
Roberto says this matter isn't over by any means. From his home in Buenos Aires, he has already asked the Medical Board of California to re-open its investigation, based on the opinions of experts he hired to assess the case. He is trying to set up meetings with Medical Board personnel when he travels to the U.S. in August. I'll keep you updated.
In a three-page letter dated May 16, 2006, to Roberto Glaubach, Veronica's father, the Supervising Deputy Attorny General, Robert McKim Bell, says that three medical experts reviewed the case, and provided independent analyses of treatment provided to Veronica. Bell also says he spoke with the original investigator of the Medical Board of California, and her supervisor. The letter gives the impression of a public offiicial trying to do a careful job, saying "no expense or resources were spared in investigating the treatment and care rendered to Veronica."
But the key sentence explaining why the attorney general's office can't or won't go after the two doctors who treated Veronica is...well, bizarre might be the best description. Consider: "While the experts criticized some aspects of the treatment rendered by these physicians, they all concluded that any departures from the standard of care rose to the level of so-called 'simple departures'--which is to say ordinary negligence--not the severe misbehavior upon which the Board is legally authorized to act."
So if I understand this correctly, "ordinary negligence"--whatever that is--is okay. What is the difference between "ordinary negligence" and "severe misbehavior"? You've got me. But next time I visit a physician, maybe I'll give caution him: "If you screw up with anything, doc, I just want it to be ordinary negligence. Don't pull any severe misbehavior on me."
Roberto says this matter isn't over by any means. From his home in Buenos Aires, he has already asked the Medical Board of California to re-open its investigation, based on the opinions of experts he hired to assess the case. He is trying to set up meetings with Medical Board personnel when he travels to the U.S. in August. I'll keep you updated.
Reader Comments (2)
bach. Mr Bell wrote in said letter: "Legal charges (what are called administrative accusations) are filed against doctors in California,only when evidence exists to prove that the doctors engaged in egregious misconduct(typical acts of gross negligence,incompetence or repeated negligent acts)Equally important is the fact that such charges must,by law,be proven by an exceptionally high standard of proof(clear and convincing evidence to a reasonable certainty."
...."Our legislature has delegated to the Medical Board the punishment not of ordinary acts of negligence,but only the most severe forms of misconduct"...."I have spoken with both the assigned investigator (Senior Investigator Allan Irish) and his supervisor (Area supervising Investigator Laura Sweet).We discussed the initial investigation,the conclusions of the medical experts retained by the Board to examine this case,as well as the documents and issues presented in your correspondence".Well,MrBell, allow me to say that I personnaly submitted medical records ,a final and conclusive report from the Public Health Service investigators (more than 10 sheets) and more than six clear,coincident and conclusive reports all blaming Dr Geronimo Rodriguez Md OBGYM from Pasadena,Joseph Li Md OBGYM from Pasadena and nurses of the Huntington Memorial,as direct responsibles of the death of my poor child. Causes ?: Gross Incompetence,Gross Negligence and a transparent,undeniable demonstration of the most absolute Medical Ignorance.Said reports have been given and signed by six renowned and respected experts in USA and in Argentina.There`s no doubt,not a single doubt about this case of malpractice. The medical records,even with evidence of some willful "cosmetical touchs",with false illegible entries,with misleading statements and incongruences (in several reports signed by involved doctors and nurses),with spoil of evidence,doesn`t resist the minnimum analysis.Notwithstanding the serious and complete information I`ve delivered to the Board investigator Mr Irish and to Mr Mc Kim Bell,asking for a clear investigation,he responded that..." It is our conclusion that the steps taken by the staff of the medical board were comprehensive and their initial determination not to prosecute was an appropriate one.Three medical experts (sic)..reviewed this case...(.allow me to say Mr Bell that Mr Irish confessed me that only one expert reviewed the case) Nevertheless I defy you to put white over black and release said three supposed experts reports-if they really exist,to challenge our reports and speciallySir, I defy you to explain us by this same mean or whatever ,OF WHAT KIND OF "PARTICULAR TREATMENTS ADMINISTERED BY DRS LI AND RODRIGUEZ" (mentioned in your self indulgent letter ) are you talking about ?? All our experts are coincident in one point: Nor Rodriguez neither Li recognized any single symptom or any outcome of the mild preclampsia in progress to eclampsia and finnaly HELLP suffered by my poor daughter. ABSOLUTE IGNORANCE !! Dangerous Individuals with license to kill with no punishment !!
When a ICU doctor,called after a Blue Code realized what was going on,it was very late,she was out of any possibility,out of
hope,agonizing,decerebrated. They did not performed any kind of treatement.Just take a look on the final report of Dr Rodriguez
He never mentioned anything pertaining to a diagnosis,no one single word
about preclampsia eclampsia or hellp,and that`s understandable,because mentioning said diagnosis he would be constrained, to explain what kind of management or treatment administered to my child. End of story about the bad faith of Mr Rodriguez If you Mr Bell agree with the co-opted and colluded staff of the Medical Board and its "self indulgent and faked" report done to protect wrongdoers (a real brotherhood of physicians) you have to explain as well of what kind of timely treatment ,management or whatever accurate diagnosis and prescription are you (or the board`s experts) talking about, because no one timely diagnosis,nor a timely management (as a consequence of said lack of diagnosis) emerge or come forth from the medical records. Notwithstanding said evidence, try Mr Bell ! You talk about Single Departure ? Allow me to ask Mr Bell,and..with the due respect of course, do you know if there is any limit to define what the hell (excuse me) is a single departure ? Of course not Mr Bell,because said definition of the Medical Practice Act is nothing else than a corrupted arranged bargain clause impossed to legislators by the medical syndicate with "of course " the blessing of the insurance cartel.You shoul go to 1975 when MICRA was enacted and the Board created and follow satistics and the blurred and uselessness story of this "wellknown" Board. Just in case ...Don`t you know ? Said definiton is nothing else than a big black hole through which the complaints submitted to the board can be expeditiously dismissed,as it mostly happens.Any board`s reviewer report concerning a malpractice case ,even if it involves the death of the patient( as in my daughter`s case ) can be constructed ("drawn" ) in appearance as scientifically correct but using some points "out of context" or even ignoring or avoiding central points .That`s exactly what the board`s staff made in this case and what you Mr Bell endorse indeed.! I wonder myself what would be your position Mr Bell if this case were your daughter`s case ? Would you accept so quick the fake report of the board`s investigator ??? The nature of the human being is so intricate !! You never ever can imagine that a disgrace like this can happen to you....On August, 2006 during my last visit to LA I`ve tried to contact you Mr Bell,asked for an appointment.You denied the possibility (by fax) with a kiddy explanation how was: that the DAG`s office was not prepeared to attend drop in visitors, I`m sure that you are not a bad mannered person,I`m sure you are not such a kind of person who believes that is over the rest of mortals, don`t you ? I went personnaly to your office at Ronald Reagan Building in two opportunities.waiting for hours.with the hope to get directly from you, (you signed the mentioned letter), a clear explanation about from which kind of standardized medical treatement,-not given of course -,those "animals not-doctors" departed to commit just a Single Departure. It is clear Mr Bell that you are and will be unable to give even a single explanation
because the real fact is that no one timely or single accurate treatment has been performed on this case,not even a "by far standard and allways indicated "blood transfussion. Veronica died with "no one platelet" many hours after that horrendous Lab tests were showing ,with "big red lights" a terrible decrease of the quantity of platelets. This is just to give one among a collection of examples about the colossal ignorance showed by said "doctors" . And those are the individuals protected by the "so particular" point of view of the board`s reviewer and with the ok of the DAG,(you Mr Bell), who has the duty of control acccording with the last legislative reports on the board`s investigation (after OCRegister 2002 series Doctors without discipline) and the monitor program (vertical prosecution).In short Mr Bell.on behalf of my grandaughter who lives in LA and on behalf of my poor daughter,I demand Justice,Justice and nothing else than Justice .You as attorney general
YOU have the power to clarify this case.
I`m sure that you know that the malpractice in California is an epidemy due to the irresponsibility of the Board`s authorities co-opted by physicians org.and a poor control over the Board. In the meanwhile,patients are dying and will die on the hands of unskilled professionals.
Roberto Glaubach,architect
robertoglaubach@yahoo.com
Posadas 1265 (1011) Buenos Aires
Argentina