Please help me reply to this discussion post...

For this discussion post I chose the case of Minnie E. Pittman, plaintiff v. James O. Gilmore, defendant. In this case, Mrs. Pittman accused Dr. Gilmore of medical malpractice which led to the death of her husband Carl Pittman.

The events of this case began on January 11^th, 1974, when Mr. Pittman experienced a significant amount of bleeding from his mouth and threw up or spit out large amounts of blood including some blood clots. He was taken to the Oxford-Lafayette County Hospital where he was seen in the emergency room by the defendant, Dr. Gilmore.

After his evaluation of Mr. Pittman, Dr. Gilmore decided to admit him to the hospital. At that time both Mrs. Pittman, the plaintiff, and a neighbor who assisted with getting Mr. Pittman to the hospital, Mr. Montgomery, notified Dr. Gilmore that Mr. Pittman had experienced extensive loss of blood through his mouth.

From the time of his admission until the morning of January 13^th, Mr. Pittman continued intermittently coughing up blood. The amount of blood expectorated by Mr. Pittman was not always large amounts but was sufficient that the medical team was aware of it.

On the morning of January 13^th, around 4:25 a.m., Mr. Pittman experienced another episode of significant hemorrhage. It is unclear to the experts that testified whether the blood came from his lungs, abdomen, or esophagus. However, the significant amount of blood passing from Mr. Pittman's mouth led the nurse caring for him to notify Dr. Gilmore. From the end of this second episode of hemorrhage until the next day, January 14^th, Mr. Pittman continued to intermittently cough up blood. Finally, on January 14^th, around 4 a.m., Mr. Pittman had a third and final extensive hemorrhage event where he passed a significant amount of blood through his mouth and expired roughly ten minutes after the start of this event at age 58.

The plaintiff, Mrs. Pittman, argued that Dr. Gilmore was negligent because he did not provide the appropriate care that was necessary to remedy her husband's condition such as inserting a nasogastric tube into her husband's stomach or failing to cross match his blood for a possible blood transfusion. Additionally, she argued that Dr. Gilmore was guilty of negligence because he failed to recognize the seriousness of her husband's condition and therefore did not seek out the help of a specialist who may have been more capable of appropriately and effectively treating her husband.

After hearing the opinions of expert witnesses from both sides, the court ruled that Dr. Gilmore was not at fault for failing to insert a nasogastric tube or cross match Mr. Pittman's blood in preparation for a possible blood transfusion. However, the court did hold that Dr. Gilmore was negligent in not recognizing the seriousness of Mr. Pittman's condition, given his extensive bleeding over the course of his hospital admission, and that this failure on the part of Dr. Gilmore did not conform to the standard of care typically adhered to by general practitioners in the Oxford area.

In conclusion, the court found that Dr. Gilmore was not guilty of any negligence that proximately contributed to Mr. Pittman's death. However, he was negligent in his failure to recognize the seriousness of Mr. Pittman's condition and call in a specialist in chest surgery. Given this information, the court believed that there was enough evidence to show there was some potential that Mr. Pittman's life could have been saved had he received treatment from a specialist, and a judgement for $75,000 was awarded to the plaintiff, Mrs. Pittman.

Reference:

Pittman v. Gilmore, 556 F.2d 1259 (5th Cir. 1977).https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10987823697406875926&q=Pittman+v.+Gilmore&hl=en&as_sdt=6,49