Surgically inflicted tinnitus

Angelo Campanella acampane at postbox.acs.ohio-state.edu
Mon Jun 19 22:19:52 EST 1995


In article <3s445n$e1j at lastactionhero.rs.itd.umich.edu> mstaben at umich.edu (Matthew S. Staben) writes:
>From: mstaben at umich.edu (Matthew S. Staben)
>Subject: Re: Surgically inflicted tinnitus
>Date: Mon, 19 Jun 1995 15:12:59 GMT

>twday at netcom.com (Tom Day) wrote:

>>Last year I had nasal reconstructive surgery. 
>>A few weeks after the surgery, a vein deep
>>in my sinus cavity burst and an inflatable catheter was inserted 
>>deep into my right nostril to stop the bleeding.  Within a few hours
>>I returned to the emergency room because I felt tremendous pressure
>>building up in my right ear.  My surgeon discounted the pressure and
>>pain and the catheter was left in place.  By the next morning, my
>>ear was loudly ringing and was nearly deaf.  The catheter was slightly
>>deflated at that point and the pressure relaxed over the next few 
>>days.  A week later it was removed and I complained of the tinnitus
>>and loss of hearing.  I was tested and discovered to have experienced
>>severe hearing loss in the right ear.  

>I'd sue the bastards for all they're worth.  It appears you did the
>right thing by showing up and complaining; and the surgeon did the
>wrong thing by discounting pain and pressure.  Malpractice is what I
>call it.

To engage in a law suit, go to your yellow pages.  The "Ambulence chaser" 
type  of lawyer advertises there.  Look for expertise in "wrongful injury".
(My son was his by a car years ago, breaking both legs, almost lost a foot, 
and dislocated bith shoulders.. The driver had no insurance. We found such 
an attorney that pndered this for a few weeks, tehn discovered that my very 
own insurance had a coverage clause stating that my children on foot were 
also covered.  We were able to "stack 3 such policies... etc.)

He worked on a "contingency" basis, collecting 30% on settlement.

I should add that we did not go to court, but agreed to an "arbitrated" 
settlement (by, as it were, 3 judges).  We were satisfied..


The point


>>I am a musician.  Under no circumstances, would I have submitted to
>>an operation that could destroy my hearing.

>All the more reason to sue.  The fact that the whole procedure was
>unsuccessful (it should have been) shows the ineptness of the surgeon
>and the attractiveness of the lawsuit.

>Matt



      /\/\/\/\/\/\/\ Sound Technology /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/




More information about the Audiolog mailing list