Deciding who’s the liar?

The problem for those lodging complaints about NSW doctors with Commissioner Sue Dawson and her people at the NSW Health Care Complaints Commission, is that doctors know that all they have to do to be believed is to assert something, because if complainants assert anything different, they will be deemed to be liers.

In our reader’s experience with Dr Andrew J. Dr Brooks, Urologist, which we’ve referred to many times, when Brooks was about to administer treatment which would largely ruin his patient’s sex life for the rest of his days, it was inevitable, it always happened, and can’t be reversed, that perhaps he may have thought, “Perhaps I’d better get something in writing from my patient confirming that I’ve explained this properly, in case it won’t be believed that I did this, but that he responded with something like, “I don’t care if my sex life is largely ruined for the rest of my days, so long as there’s a chance that I won’t have to get up 2 or 3 times a night to go to the toilet.””

But no, Brooks would have known he didn’t have to bother with anything like this.

As it turned out, in the letter dismissing our reader’s complaint, it was said, “Upon our review of all of the information gathered, we were satisfied that appropriate clinical consent was obtained, prior to your surgery. We also note Dr Brooks’ correspondence of 5 August 2014 to your referring doctor, Dr Grant, indicates that Dr Brooks did explain the risks and complications of the procedure to you.” In other words, “You’re the LIAR.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.