Waking Up Blind: Lawsuits over Eye Surgery
By Tom Harbin, MD
Summary
In the early 1980’s, professors at a highly-respected academic medical center began to notice problems with their gifted chairman, a powerful figure on campus. His patients complained of long delays and rushed exams. His bills to Medicare and insurance companies were suspect. Too often, the tissue that he removed from patient’s eyes showed no sign of the disease that he had diagnosed.
The professors and finally the Dean urged this chairman to mend his ways. He did not. His hurried care of patients was reaping profits for the medical center and his academic pursuits were increasing the center’s prestige. He seemed to know that he’d be protected by the medical center’s top leaders. He was right.
Finally, on a typically rushed day, he operated on the wrong eye of a patient, who eventually went blind from an easily detected and treatable problem. A departmental committee investigation found improper billing, examples of patients’ eyes harmed by neglect, and multiple other problems.
Once again, the university’s leaders paid little heed, approving a committee recommendation that did nothing more than ask its own chairman to slow down. Lawsuits and continued complaints from two faculty whistleblowers prompted a university ethics investigation. The result: exoneration for the chairman and a reprimand for a whistleblower.
Only after a national specialty society ethics investigation and even more lawsuits was the chairman forced to resign. What little was known of the story made headlines at the time, but now the full story is told, backed by court documents, official transcripts, letters and personal interviews.
By Tom Harbin, MD
Summary
In the early 1980’s, professors at a highly-respected academic medical center began to notice problems with their gifted chairman, a powerful figure on campus. His patients complained of long delays and rushed exams. His bills to Medicare and insurance companies were suspect. Too often, the tissue that he removed from patient’s eyes showed no sign of the disease that he had diagnosed.
The professors and finally the Dean urged this chairman to mend his ways. He did not. His hurried care of patients was reaping profits for the medical center and his academic pursuits were increasing the center’s prestige. He seemed to know that he’d be protected by the medical center’s top leaders. He was right.
Finally, on a typically rushed day, he operated on the wrong eye of a patient, who eventually went blind from an easily detected and treatable problem. A departmental committee investigation found improper billing, examples of patients’ eyes harmed by neglect, and multiple other problems.
Once again, the university’s leaders paid little heed, approving a committee recommendation that did nothing more than ask its own chairman to slow down. Lawsuits and continued complaints from two faculty whistleblowers prompted a university ethics investigation. The result: exoneration for the chairman and a reprimand for a whistleblower.
Only after a national specialty society ethics investigation and even more lawsuits was the chairman forced to resign. What little was known of the story made headlines at the time, but now the full story is told, backed by court documents, official transcripts, letters and personal interviews.
