Sacramento Patient Sues Doctor For Her Perforated Colon, Part 3 of 4

It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this medical malpractice case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser Permanente, UC Davis Medical Center, Mercy, or Sutter.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury case and its proceedings.)

Issues before the Court for Trial
Informed Consent

Dr. Black had a duty to inform his patient of the risks associated with the procedure to be performed. He breached that duty by failing to properly provide that information. Instead, he relied upon a consent form which, in fact, did not detail any of the risks other than to simply state that risks do exist.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Dr. Black suffers from a nervous condition that causes his hands to tremble when he is stressed. He failed to disclose his condition to Ms. Hill. During the endoscopy he perforated approximately 60% of the circumference of the colon. He claims the colon was perforated 3-4 days earlier from some unknown cause. This most likely occurred from his handling of the colonoscope itself, perhaps mishandled by trembling hands.

For failure to disclose risk of perforation and failure to disclose his nervous disorder, the consent provided by Ms. Hill was not informed consent. As such, Dr. Black lacked consent for the procedure that would eventually send Ms. Hill into excruciating pain and land her in the Intensive Care Unit at Universal Hospital. Performing a medical procedure in the absence of informed consent is a battery.

Ms. Hill was not even due to have her next colonoscopy that year or the next. It was something simply recommended to her as a breast cancer survivor. Had she been explained the risk of what could happen, and with her then being asymptomatic, she would have declined the procedure at that time.

But for the colonoscopy, Ms. Hill’s colon would not have been perforated. If a colonoscopy had not caused a perforation (or if any pre-existing perforation had been properly diagnosed), her head and body would not have been grotesquely distorted by the blasts of air that Dr. Black was shooting into her colon. That air escaped through the perforation, into the peritoneal cavity, and all the way up to her skull. It caused a subcutaneous emphysema that made her body blow up like the Michelin Man, causing extreme pain.

The colon was so badly perforated that a section had to be removed, and a colostomy performed. She had to wear a colostomy bag for about six months until another surgery took it down.

The endoscopy performed without informed consent caused Ms. Hill’s injuries, and resulted in her pain, suffering, extended hospitalizations, overall weakness, loss of income, and inability to enjoy life. (See Part 4 of 4.)

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Contact Information