Would another doctor be held responsible?

StacyJ

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
2,840
Points
0
I have another question regarding Murray's case. If Dr. David Adams was aware that a non-anesthesiologist ( cardiologist Murray) was planning on administering anesthesia to a patient for the purpose of using it for non-medical reasons, does he have an obligation to report the doctor to the medical board?

I am now upset with Adams because even if he didn't administer the propofol it sounds like he was well aware of what Murray was planning on doing. He should've been absolutely appalled if Murray came to him asking to put MJ into a unconscious drug induced state for sleep. Adams should've reported his behind to the medical board and he probably would've saved MJ's life. I wonder if Dr Adams has a guilty conscience?
 
StacyJ;3200983 said:
I have another question regarding Murray's case. If Dr. David Adams was aware that a non-anesthesiologist ( cardiologist Murray) was planning on administering anesthesia to a patient for the purpose of using it for non-medical reasons, does he have an obligation to report the doctor to the medical board?

I am now upset with Adams because even if he didn't administer the propofol it sounds like he was well aware of what Murray was planning on doing. He should've been absolutely appalled if Murray came to him asking to put MJ into a unconscious drug induced state for sleep. Adams should've reported his behind to the medical board and he probably would've saved MJ's life. I wonder if Dr Adams has a guilty conscience?

From testimony on the Prelim Detective Martinez said that Murray said MJ and Murray visited Adams in his clinic in Vegas in March! But, Adams denies it!

I Can't find the source with link! But,this post below is from someone on the KOP board! That was from Dr. Adams lawyer!

“If Dr. Murray actually said that, he was lying"
In a search warrant affidavit, Murray claims between March and April, he arranged for Adams to treat Jackson with Propofol, and was there to witness the procedure.
"My client wasn't in California in June, May, April, or even March," Agwara said. “Murray called him and asked for a meeting."
The attorney would not go into detail about what happened at that meeting in March or even where it was at, but he said that was the one and only time the two doctors have met.
"Why Dr. Murray has chosen to drag my client's name into this, we don't know," Agwara said.
Agwara admitted Adams had given Jackson Propofol before -- on three or four occasions in 2008 -- all for dental procedures. “
 
Last edited:
This is an interesting question. I did some research from the the Cal. Med Board FAQs:

"I have heard that Dr. X is prescribing large amounts of pain medication to people who are addicted to this medication. Will the Board investigate Dr. X?

This concern can be investigated by the Board. However, to investigate a physician's care/treatment, the Board needs information on a patient or patients. The Board can't assess the "quality" of care without focusing on a particular patient, as the Board has no authority to audit or review a physician's medical records without patient consent (or a subpoena which needs to be specific to a patient). If you have any information ...

As a licensed physician, am I required to report another physician to the Board if I am concerned that the physician may be physically or mentally impaired?

There is no mandatory reporting requirement in the Medical Practice Act to report a colleague for possible impairment. However, as the Board's mission is to provide patient protection, the Board clearly is concerned about physicians who potentially present a danger to their patients. Reporting an impaired colleague to the Medical Board will allow the Board to ensure adequate protections are in place so the public will not be harmed by a colleague who requires assistance. The sources of complaint information are kept confidential by the Board."

In the first instance a patient must be identified; in the second instance even though we aren't talking about murray as an 'impaired' physician, per se, I would guess the same would apply: no mandatory reporting.

Nevada's Med Board site wasn't as easy to navigate or read and I couldn't find an answer to the question but I unearthed the following: (a wee bit off topic, I know)
Grounds for Initiating Disciplinary Action or Denying Licensure

NRS 630.301 Criminal offenses; disciplinary action taken by other jurisdiction; surrender of previous license while under investigation; malpractice; ... violating or exploiting trust of patient for financial or personal gain; failure to offer appropriate care with intent to positively influence financial well-being; engaging in disreputable conduct; ...
11. Conviction of:
(a) Murder, voluntary manslaughter or mayhem; (Notice INvoluntary manslaughter is not one of them!)
NRS 630.306
5. Practicing or offering to practice beyond the scope permitted by law or performing services which the licensee knows or has reason to know that he or she is not competent to perform or which are beyond the scope of his or her training.
7. Continual failure to exercise the skill or diligence or use the methods ordinarily exercised under the same circumstances by physicians in good standing practicing in the same specialty or field.

NAC 630.040 “Malpractice” interpreted. (NRS 630.130) For the purposes of chapter 630 of NRS, “malpractice” means the failure of a physician, in treating a patient, to use the reasonable care, skill, or knowledge ordinarily used under similar circumstances But of course there are NO similar circumstances!! anywhere!

So I don't understand why they didn't yank murray's license last year.
But I couldn't find any requirement for one physician to report another. The medical community is always loath to step on one another's toes. I really do believe that Adams would have had a hard time reporting something that might have been only contemplated and that he had no first hand knowledge of. I don't see how the med board (of either state) could have done anything at that point in time.
 
I always wondered to if Cherilyn Lee or either Alan Metzger feel guilty. They both claim MJ asked them about propofol for sleeping and he seemed kind of desperate to sleep. I wonder if they now feel they should've went public or at least went to the medical board with this information. They could've prevented MJ's death. I also think they could've found out which doctor MJ was seeing and approached him about it. I think Metzger could've easily found out who MJ was seeing.
 
I think we have to stop expecting everyone else in Michael's life to be noticed and done something about Michael's "problems". Michael was an adult male with 3 children who took care of himself and his family.

This wish that other people could have seen what was 'wrong' and 'saved' Michael is presumptuous and does Michael a dis-service.

We do not know the full picture, so blaming people for their actions (or lack thereof) is wrong.

Michael died because of the incompetence of Conrad Murray.
 
Lee and Metzger should've disclosed their info or whatever that was to the officials, not go to the media as Lee did first and start the Propofol craze.

I agree with the post above. What was wrong for real was Murray, who left his patient that hired him (allegedly...) die. Maybe or for sure nothing helped Michael sleep, so at least the proper medical equipment and monitoring on behalf of the doctor while administering what he did could have been... something, he could've been alive. The overwhelming responsibility lies on Murray which showed literally no concern for human life on June 25. But Lee, for instance, is responsible for damaging Jackson's already damaged reputation, for saying how he 'begged' her for Diprivan, true or not, take it to the police, not the hounding, bloodthirsty media.
 
But Lee, for instance, is responsible for damaging Jackson's already damaged reputation, for saying how he 'begged' her for Diprivan,
did she say that? i thought she said he asked if he knew someone that could get it for him which makes no sense as murray was already buying it by the bucket load at that point anyway
 
Lee and Metzger should've disclosed their info or whatever that was to the officials, not go to the media as Lee did first and start the Propofol craze.

I agree with the post above. What was wrong for real was Murray, who left his patient that hired him (allegedly...) die. Maybe or for sure nothing helped Michael sleep, so at least the proper medical equipment and monitoring on behalf of the doctor while administering what he did could have been... something, he could've been alive. The overwhelming responsibility lies on Murray which showed literally no concern for human life on June 25. But Lee, for instance, is responsible for damaging Jackson's already damaged reputation, for saying how he 'begged' her for Diprivan, true or not, take it to the police, not the hounding, bloodthirsty media.

yeah I wonder if Murray is going to use her for his defense.
 
did she say that? i thought she said he asked if he knew someone that could get it for him which makes no sense as murray was already buying it by the bucket load at that point anyway

well I remember her saying that MJ begged her to find an anesthesiologist who could do it for him. It will be interesting to see if she is called by either the prosecution or the defense. The fact that she said it was dangerous and is not a safe medicine won't bode well for Murray. If she knew it why didn't the professional 20 year medical doctor?
 
Yeah. And the headlines burned with the 'begging' thing..

I just don't see how her statements will help the defense, how anything could help Murray after he himself administered that to Michael, for Only a doctor would have been able to order Massive amounts of Dipr like he did; and since he wants to be absolved from All of guilt still, he blames it on the dead man who can't talk now and defend himself. He's too confident, he's got support too, and that's beyond unsettling.
 
First she said he begged then she said he only asked!

But, by the time she changed wait she said it was to late the media ran with the "begged" story!
 
bluetopez raises a point that I need clarification on.

With the media, the first set of coverage sets the tone. So when Oxman proclaimed Michael to have had a drug problem minutes after his death was announced, that was all the media was going to focus on.

My question is who came out with the 'begged' scenario first - Murray or Lee? My personal belief is that one fed off of the other. And neither may have any basis in truth.
 
bluetopez raises a point that I need clarification on.

With the media, the first set of coverage sets the tone. So when Oxman proclaimed Michael to have had a drug problem minutes after his death was announced, that was all the media was going to focus on.

My question is who came out with the 'begged' scenario first - Murray or Lee? My personal belief is that one fed off of the other. And neither may have any basis in truth.

It was Lee I believe at least publicly before we knew what Murray had told police
 
My question is who came out with the 'begged' scenario first - Murray or Lee? My personal belief is that one fed off of the other. And neither may have any basis in truth.
murray talked to the police on the 27th i think it was. so it depends on if u are talking about publically talking about it media wise


well I remember her saying that MJ begged her to find an anesthesiologist
so what was it? begging for dip which makes no sense from the timeline or asking if she knew an anthe.. who would give it to him. asking for an anthe.. helps mj and hurts murray
 
media wise it was lee then. she said she came forward when the whole demoral OD was doing the rounds early on. she came out and said she was angry ppl were portraying him as an addict.
 
bluetopez raises a point that I need clarification on.

With the media, the first set of coverage sets the tone. So when Oxman proclaimed Michael to have had a drug problem minutes after his death was announced, that was all the media was going to focus on.

My question is who came out with the 'begged' scenario first - Murray or Lee? My personal belief is that one fed off of the other. And neither may have any basis in truth.

It was Lee. I watched the coverage closely in those first days (as horrific as it was!). I don't think the media had ahold of the "propofol" idea yet, until she popped up and made the talk-show rounds.

One of the very FIRST jerks to speak was Deepak Chopra, though, who jumped right in there and said Michael had died of a "demerol overdose," and prattled on about "drug addiction." After Lee's statements, he STFU.
 
no other dr would be held responsible unless they were in the room with murray
 
I think we have to stop expecting everyone else in Michael's life to be noticed and done something about Michael's "problems". Michael was an adult male with 3 children who took care of himself and his family.

This wish that other people could have seen what was 'wrong' and 'saved' Michael is presumptuous and does Michael a dis-service.

We do not know the full picture, so blaming people for their actions (or lack thereof) is wrong.

Michael died because of the incompetence of Conrad Murray.
SO true.
 
No other doctor will be held liable. Here is why: Murray did the injection. Murray brought the drugs. Murray left MJ when he was suppose to stay there. So even if MJ saw say Klein, it was NOT Dr. Klein drugs that killed MJ, it was Murray's lack of doing his job that did it. This is just like if I fight someone last year and that person go and get into a fight with someone else a year later and die from a hard blow to a body part from that person. Is that my fault and should the police come back and arrest me. NO. That person died from the blow that the current individual gave to him/her.
 
Back
Top