Re: Medical malpractice...food for thought

What do you think of the wording here in the first paragraph: "When the physician fails to act in accordance with the standards set in his or her field, he or she may be guilty of medical...."

Specifically: "the standards set in his or her field" ...wouldn't they be covered with just those stupid, three sample cardboard kits that they give out? That don't turn up anything?

If they did those, would that be all they had to do? The "standard" necessary in "their field". I would think if you presented with all of the symptoms, the lesions, the swollen lymph, the little cysts and nodules that form by your joints, the vision, the discharge around your eyes...

I had all of these at the ER. He slouched in his chair with his legs wide apart, arms folded across his chest, and said people would think I had "mental issues" if I claim this. And this is with bad lesions on legs. They take forever, if ever to heal. I don't touch them, I don't scratch the skin or pick at it. I take the baths, put stuff on for bacterial reasons, and leave it alone. I'm not stupid. He never examined me at all. I was so humiliated. He put itchy skin as diagnosis on release form. I took pictures of what they look like. Tweet