Medical Malpractice/hypocalcemia after thryoidectomy
hi. i had a thyroidectomy in 2011 which injured my parathyroids. I checked the pathology report and it confirmed that they were not removed. The surgeon told me after the surgery that there might be a problem and there was. i was hopsitalized for a week after my thyroidectomy for them to stabilize my calcium. i now live with a hypocalcemia. SInce the surgery , i have lost my focus. my concentration is not the best anymore. i am a mother with three kids and i work. i can't manage as well as i used to before the surgery. i am always fatigued. i have constant hand tremors. i am a nurse by profession but i have a hard time concentrating on things that I need to at work. i know that the statute of limitations are running out to file a malpractice lawsuit against the surgeon. when it first happened i contacted several lawyers and no one would take my case. One lawyer said that I would have to prove negligence and also show my long term complications. I am wondering if this is something still worth pursuing. I was told that there is a very slight possibilty of permanent hypocalcemia but non one warned me what it is to live with this disease on a long term basis.
Unless an attorney you contact about this case has had a previous case on the same subject, we woulnd not know if injury to the parathyroid and you suffered here is evidence of negligent surgery. Only an experienced surgeon could answer the question. In some quick research I did, it was mentioned that such injuries and the resulting calcium problem are decreasing due to better surgical techniques. However, most of us lawyers would not even get to the issue because all of symptoms you complain off, except the hand tremors, are far too vague and generalized and potentially caused by any number of other factors and difficult to test for and quantify.........and so the damages are not very high as they must be for a lawyer to take the case. Let's say you find a surgeon/expert to testify for you that the injury should not have occured and is per se negligence. Your lawyer has by now spent probably 10-15,000 on your case to work it up, file it, find and obtain that expert opinion. I guarantee you that the surgeon you sue will have his own experts who say "it's too bad this problem occured but it was a known risk that can't be avoided even with the best surgeon in the world and the surgery, although having this complication, was done within the standard of care and therefore, Nina's doctor was not negligence and did not commit malpractice". Then your lawyer has to depose that doctor and prepare for trial and if there actually was a trial, spend at least 15,ooo more out of pocket with at best, at best, a 50/50 chance of you winning and him getting paid anything for his hundreds of hours and months of years of work or even getting his 30K back. So, the negligence must be very strong.......which I don't know but doubt is strong here and, your damages must be very severe and permanent ............which I hope is not the case for you and you haven't made it sound that way in your question. That is why no lawyer will jump at it. Make sure to know your Statute. You don't say where you are but in my State, the time limit can be extended for 90 days or under other circumstances, such as remaining in the care of the defendant doctor. Use google to find your State Statute of Limitatins for Medical Malpractice. Hopefully treat your symptoms with supplemental Calcium and other therapies. Good luck.