Has anyone sued their doctor for negligence?

[[Lo...]]

To be battling the effects of a drug prescribed by a doctor for four years and counting and nearly loosing one’s life repeatedly in the process is something a patient probably should have been warned about as a potential outcome of using said “medicine.”

 

I was actually not aware that diazepam (valium) was even prescribed anymore. I thought it was an old drug that was largely abandoned in favor of lorazepam and other more modern, safer drugs. This is what I was told, originally. When I found out that people taper off of benzodiazepines by using valium, I was completely stunned and shocked. I was also stunned and shocked that lorazepam is actually 10 times stronger than valium. My doctor never told me that, ever.

 

Had I been informed of all this by a medical practicioner, I would not have ended up barely surviving the next four years of my life to recover from ativan-induced damage from during the first four years on it. And it was only at the end of year 4 that I started taking ativan daily, as I have developed strong dependency on it without taking it on a daily basis. That's the part that no one talks about how people can develep dependency on benzodiazepines before being prescribed them on a daily basis.

[[Rx...]]

Perhaps one could also argue why would anyone seek an M.D.'s help in the first place?  However, I would never pose such an insulting question to anyone.  For that matter, why would anyone want to pose any insulting question to shame a victim? (rhetorical).  I sought help from my former doctor.  Instead, he Rxd a HELL ride for me.  I've never suffered so much pain and agony in my entire life.  Reiterating, as I've mentioned before in this thread, all due to his malpractice.  I was never warned one could become physiologically dependent or of the danger of cold turkeying. 

[[Lo...]]

I had been criticized by therapists I'd seen for being on benzodiazepines, but none of them actually knew what to say, how to support me and/or offer any basic empathy. I saw a therapist today, and he kept writing things down, so distant from my suffering and either pretending that he doesn't understand what I am dealing with or not understanding what I am dealing with or both. He made a snide remark about me calling helplines, and I responded that those helplines have helped me more than all the doctors and therapists combined. I am so tired of therapists who are treating what I have as a mild anxiety disorder. If this is what therapists are like, then why are these therapists so critical of me taking Rx drugs?

 

It seems to me that all these professionals "treating me" are in a liability-driven, damage control mode rather than there to actually help me. It's a sad state of affairs that I have to resort to anonymous online forums, helplines and herbal supplements because modern medicine/mental health field is unable/unwilling to help me.

[[bu...]]

...and my fundamental question remains the same (and apparently unanswered  )

 

So did you not see an obvious, positive, therapeutic effect?  And if they did not benefit you, why did you continue to take them?

[[Lo...]]

...and my fundamental question remains the same (and apparently unanswered  )

 

So did you not see an obvious, positive, therapeutic effect?  And if they did not benefit you, why did you continue to take them?

 

Apparently, there is no antidote for the damage they had done to me, so I continue to take them because I would die otherwise and my mother would not have a place to live anymore and would probably die from grief and broken-heartedness and not having a place to live at anymore. I don't think mothers should have to bury their children, ever, so that is the only reason I stay alive. I have given up on myself long time ago.

[[Le...]]

KUDOS mon Pilote!!!!!! 

 

It was my husband who noticed I wasn’t getting the therapeutic affect anymore as I was just so blinded by tolerance and chasing the symptoms it created.

 

I wish I could post exactly what I would like to do to the doctors that continue to prescribe these meds knowing all this information has been out there for like 40 years... but I know the BB rules. 

[[se...]]

...and my fundamental question remains the same (and apparently unanswered  )

 

So did you not see an obvious, positive, therapeutic effect?  And if they did not benefit you, why did you continue to take them?

 

I did all the way up until I stopped.  I tried again and they helped again but I discovered what they had done and would continue to do to me with the help of online resources.  I think people have been addressing your point?  If you don't believe so, clarifying further would be the tactful way to respond.

[[Rx...]]

...and my fundamental question remains the same (and apparently unanswered  )

 

So did you not see an obvious, positive, therapeutic effect?  And if they did not benefit you, why did you continue to take them?

 

builder, nobody can turn back the hands of time even if they wanted to.  Do you mind answering what your emoji expresses?

[[mo...]]

It's interesting what this thread turned into. I asked the question "Has anyone sued their doctor for negligence" and provided a bit of information to give the question some context. Because I wanted to know if anyone had sued their doctor for negligence. I didn't ask for assistance to clarify if my doctor was negligent. I have the answer to that question already. And I don't owe anyone an explanation as to how I got myself into this. None of us owe anyone an explanation. The important thing is we are here now and we we healing. I don't care if anyone in this group abused a drug or took it longer than you should have or were prescribed it for moderate depression and sleep and were stupid enough to think it was safe and a thing people take for that. We all have debilitating symptoms and we all just want to be well. My doctor was negligent and many other doctors agree (for wherever their opinion is worth anyway). Apparently there are doctor police on this thread who feel it's their job to question my experience. I thank those of you who actually answered the question I posed to you and I won't be checking this thread any longer. I expect to receive criticism and judgement outside of this group and this is supposed to be a supportive place from what I understand.

[[se...]]

It's interesting what this thread turned into. I asked the question "Has anyone sued their doctor for negligence" and provided a bit of information to give the question some context. Because I wanted to know if anyone had sued their doctor for negligence. I didn't ask for assistance to clarify if my doctor was negligent. I have the answer to that question already. And I don't owe anyone an explanation as to how I got myself into this. None of us owe anyone an explanation. The important thing is we are here now and we we healing. I don't care if anyone in this group abused a drug or took it longer than you should have or were prescribed it for moderate depression and sleep and were stupid enough to think it was safe and a thing people take for that. We all have debilitating symptoms and we all just want to be well. My doctor was negligent and many other doctors agree (for wherever their opinion is worth anyway). Apparently there are doctor police on this thread who feel it's their job to question my experience. I thank those of you who actually answered the question I posed to you and I won't be checking this thread any longer. I expect to receive criticism and judgement outside of this group and this is supposed to be a supportive place from what I understand.

 

I think it just evolved as some of the more debatable topics here do.  You did call some responders "victim shamers" which maybe perpetuated some of it.  I think you can ask for one of the mods to lock it though.  I appreciate hearing these perspectives on BB personally.  It helps more fully understand where I traveled and landed throughout this process.  Sometimes some posts spark other related issues for discussion and good discussion ensues.  I'm not sure anyone was intending to personally criticize you.  I see a lot of supportive posts from many of those who responded here.

[[bu...]]

...and my fundamental question remains the same (and apparently unanswered  )

 

So did you not see an obvious, positive, therapeutic effect?  And if they did not benefit you, why did you continue to take them?

 

builder, nobody can turn back the hands of time even if they wanted to.  Do you mind answering what your emoji expresses?

 

Well, I guess it expresses a kind of confusion, or amazement!

 

.  If someone takes a med for 3, 4, 5, years or more, then they surely must have been getting a significant therapeutic benefit from it.  That's why they chose to continue taking it.  So the doc (and by extension the pharma company) are simply filling their appropriate role, treating the patient's condition.  How can you fault the doc for doing exactly what you hired him to do...provide a therapy to help resolve your condition.

 

And if you continued to take a med for months or years and was not getting any benefit, then sorry, IMO, that's on YOU.

 

 

[[Rx...]]

...and my fundamental question remains the same (and apparently unanswered  )

 

So did you not see an obvious, positive, therapeutic effect?  And if they did not benefit you, why did you continue to take them?

 

builder, nobody can turn back the hands of time even if they wanted to.  Do you mind answering what your emoji expresses?

 

Well, I guess it expresses a kind of confusion, or amazement!

 

.  If someone takes a med for 3, 4, 5, years or more, then they surely must have been getting a significant therapeutic benefit from it.  That's why they chose to continue taking it.  So the doc (and by extension the pharma company) are simply filling their appropriate role, treating the patient's condition.  How can you fault the doc for doing exactly what you hired him to do...provide a therapy to help resolve your condition.

 

And if you continued to take a med for months or years and was not getting any benefit, then sorry, IMO, that's on YOU.

 

Empathy is a gift.

[[Lo...]]

...and my fundamental question remains the same (and apparently unanswered  )

 

So did you not see an obvious, positive, therapeutic effect?  And if they did not benefit you, why did you continue to take them?

 

builder, nobody can turn back the hands of time even if they wanted to.  Do you mind answering what your emoji expresses?

 

Well, I guess it expresses a kind of confusion, or amazement!

 

.  If someone takes a med for 3, 4, 5, years or more, then they surely must have been getting a significant therapeutic benefit from it.  That's why they chose to continue taking it.  So the doc (and by extension the pharma company) are simply filling their appropriate role, treating the patient's condition.  How can you fault the doc for doing exactly what you hired him to do...provide a therapy to help resolve your condition.

 

And if you continued to take a med for months or years and was not getting any benefit, then sorry, IMO, that's on YOU.

 

Empathy is a gift.

 

I think all those years on alcohol erased it in him. Just like my father. Same thing.

[[mo...]]

It's interesting what this thread turned into. I asked the question "Has anyone sued their doctor for negligence" and provided a bit of information to give the question some context. Because I wanted to know if anyone had sued their doctor for negligence. I didn't ask for assistance to clarify if my doctor was negligent. I have the answer to that question already. And I don't owe anyone an explanation as to how I got myself into this. None of us owe anyone an explanation. The important thing is we are here now and we we healing. I don't care if anyone in this group abused a drug or took it longer than you should have or were prescribed it for moderate depression and sleep and were stupid enough to think it was safe and a thing people take for that. We all have debilitating symptoms and we all just want to be well. My doctor was negligent and many other doctors agree (for wherever their opinion is worth anyway). Apparently there are doctor police on this thread who feel it's their job to question my experience. I thank those of you who actually answered the question I posed to you and I won't be checking this thread any longer. I expect to receive criticism and judgement outside of this group and this is supposed to be a supportive place from what I understand.

 

I think it just evolved as some of the more debatable topics here do.  You did call some responders "victim shamers" which maybe perpetuated some of it.  I think you can ask for one of the mods to lock it though.  I appreciate hearing these perspectives on BB personally.  It helps more fully understand where I traveled and landed throughout this process.  Sometimes some posts spark other related issues for discussion and good discussion ensues.  I'm not sure anyone was intending to personally criticize you.  I see a lot of supportive posts from many of those who responded here.

 

Yes topics can morph into others, of course no issue with that. Glad if this post helped you or others.

[[Lo...]]

...and my fundamental question remains the same (and apparently unanswered  )

 

So did you not see an obvious, positive, therapeutic effect?  And if they did not benefit you, why did you continue to take them?

 

builder, nobody can turn back the hands of time even if they wanted to.  Do you mind answering what your emoji expresses?

 

Well, I guess it expresses a kind of confusion, or amazement!

 

.  If someone takes a med for 3, 4, 5, years or more, then they surely must have been getting a significant therapeutic benefit from it.  That's why they chose to continue taking it.  So the doc (and by extension the pharma company) are simply filling their appropriate role, treating the patient's condition.  How can you fault the doc for doing exactly what you hired him to do...provide a therapy to help resolve your condition.

 

And if you continued to take a med for months or years and was not getting any benefit, then sorry, IMO, that's on YOU.

 

Empathy is a gift.

 

I think all those years on alcohol erased it in him. Just like my father. Same thing.

 

My apologies for acting like a jerk here.

[[bu...]]

...and my fundamental question remains the same (and apparently unanswered  )

 

So did you not see an obvious, positive, therapeutic effect?  And if they did not benefit you, why did you continue to take them?

 

builder, nobody can turn back the hands of time even if they wanted to.  Do you mind answering what your emoji expresses?

 

Well, I guess it expresses a kind of confusion, or amazement!

 

.  If someone takes a med for 3, 4, 5, years or more, then they surely must have been getting a significant therapeutic benefit from it.  That's why they chose to continue taking it.  So the doc (and by extension the pharma company) are simply filling their appropriate role, treating the patient's condition.  How can you fault the doc for doing exactly what you hired him to do...provide a therapy to help resolve your condition.

 

And if you continued to take a med for months or years and was not getting any benefit, then sorry, IMO, that's on YOU.

 

Empathy is a gift.

 

Oh, I have empathy.  And I understand, from personal experience, the difficulties that benzos cause, both from the debilitating effects of using them, and the difficulties of discontinuation.  And overall, I probably had more than average difficulty discontinuing them.

 

But when I started them, I was miserable and desperate, and once I started, I felt like they were a gift from God.  So how can I hate benzos, or feel that my (very caring) doc was in any negligent because he prescribed a therapy a desperately needed and was grateful to have.

 

 

I clearly understand the downside of benzo, but they are a needed, important component of the medical arsenal.  But folks seem to forget or ignore the benefit they got from taking them. 

 

But...if they took them for several years and didn't get therapeutic results, and want to fault their doc,  well, no I guess I don't have much empathy there.

[[se...]]

Well, I guess it expresses a kind of confusion, or amazement!

 

.  If someone takes a med for 3, 4, 5, years or more, then they surely must have been getting a significant therapeutic benefit from it.  That's why they chose to continue taking it.  So the doc (and by extension the pharma company) are simply filling their appropriate role, treating the patient's condition.  How can you fault the doc for doing exactly what you hired him to do...provide a therapy to help resolve your condition.

 

And if you continued to take a med for months or years and was not getting any benefit, then sorry, IMO, that's on YOU.

 

This is rather short-sighted.  I think there are grounds for fault when prescribing long-term (past 2-4 weeks) and when signs of adverse effects present.  Especially when the patient cannot see any adverse effects themselves.  This is the role of the doctor.  I remember one of my doctors saying he wouldn't be prescribing if he didn't believe in it; kind of out of the blue it seemed at the time.  Well, that sounds ok but I think he was responding to what he was observing and during that conversation I was expressing concern about my use, trying to spark a more candid discussion which never happened.

 

 

Oh, I have empathy.  And I understand, from personal experience, the difficulties that benzos cause, both from the debilitating effects of using them, and the difficulties of discontinuation.  And overall, I probably had more than average difficulty discontinuing them.

 

But when I started them, I was miserable and desperate, and once I started, I felt like they were a gift from God.  So how can I hate benzos, or feel that my (very caring) doc was in any negligent because he prescribed a therapy a desperately needed and was grateful to have.

 

 

I clearly understand the downside of benzo, but they are a needed, important component of the medical arsenal.  But folks seem to forget or ignore the benefit they got from taking them. 

 

But...if they took them for several years and didn't get therapeutic results, and want to fault their doc,  well, no I guess I don't have much empathy there.

 

In the doctor-patient relationship, I don't think a patient can "clearly understand the downside of benzo" and I don't believe that's a correct statement for you right now either.  We're finding out more and more with all the research that's coming out.

 

And to say they're an "important component of the medical arsenal" muddles the argument here.  They do work and are powerful but being an important component does not mean prescribe long-term or simply because the patient is gaining a therapeutic effect.  This is not a very way perceptive way of addressing a problem like this.

 

Edit: short-sided = short-sighted

[[Rx...]]

...and my fundamental question remains the same (and apparently unanswered  )

 

So did you not see an obvious, positive, therapeutic effect?  And if they did not benefit you, why did you continue to take them?

 

builder, nobody can turn back the hands of time even if they wanted to.  Do you mind answering what your emoji expresses?

 

Well, I guess it expresses a kind of confusion, or amazement!

 

.  If someone takes a med for 3, 4, 5, years or more, then they surely must have been getting a significant therapeutic benefit from it.  That's why they chose to continue taking it.  So the doc (and by extension the pharma company) are simply filling their appropriate role, treating the patient's condition.  How can you fault the doc for doing exactly what you hired him to do...provide a therapy to help resolve your condition.

 

And if you continued to take a med for months or years and was not getting any benefit, then sorry, IMO, that's on YOU.

 

Empathy is a gift.

 

Oh, I have empathy.  And I understand, from personal experience, the difficulties that benzos cause, both from the debilitating effects of using them, and the difficulties of discontinuation.  And overall, I probably had more than average difficulty discontinuing them.

 

But when I started them, I was miserable and desperate, and once I started, I felt like they were a gift from God.  So how can I hate benzos, or feel that my (very caring) doc was in any negligent because he prescribed a therapy a desperately needed and was grateful to have.

 

 

I clearly understand the downside of benzo, but they are a needed, important component of the medical arsenal.  But folks seem to forget or ignore the benefit they got from taking them. 

 

But...if they took them for several years and didn't get therapeutic results, and want to fault their doc,  well, no I guess I don't have much empathy there.

 

I never experienced such a "gift from God" feeling in re to benzodiazepines Rxd me.  However, nobody is telling you how to feel re benzodiazepines or your doctor, builder.  You feel about them both the way you do.  Others have the right to feel about both benzodiazepines and their former doctors/doctors the way they do even if in total contrast to how you feel. 

 

Many powerful drugs have their place in the medical arsenal.  Properly prescribed and administered is key.  Patients should be informed of physiological dependence risk before unknowingly becoming physiologically dependent.  Patients should likewise be informed of such drugs which cannot simply be stopped (cold turkeyed).

 

Malpractice is a reality in our world that should not be dismissed.   

 

[[Lo...]]

Here are some excerpts from the book called "Mastering Your Moods" by Melvin Kinder, PhD. This is from a 1994 edition.

 

"The soothing effect of alcohol comes in the form of prescription pills, as well - a rainbow assortment. However, antianxiety drugs don't work as effectively as their proponents would have you believe. They may momentarily raise your threshold, but they can also freeze your threshold, that is, you can become dependent on the pills' effect to make you feel better--or feel less--and you can lose your ability to manage your threshold on your own. When people are on long-term, daily tranquilizers, they often come to feel that they are defective, mentally or emotionally ill, unable to cope with life without their chemical crutch. They are disempowered and the damage to their self-esteem should be recognized."

 

"And, too, perhaps, being dependent on a particular drug wouldn't be so detrimental if drugs were more advanced--that is without the side effects--but many of them are more toxic and more addictive than drug companies or doctors let you know. I am not against drugs in all cases, but I do believe you should know why and how drugs work. You should realize you are using chemicals to alter internal chemical activity that is probably okay; you don't have an illness that needs medication to cure it."

 

"Of course, there are exceptions. Some sensors have thresholds of arousal that are so low they suffer from chronic, unrelenting anxiety on a daily basis. For these people, short-term courses of antianxiety drugs can be valid and appropriate, The medication subdues their painful emotional reactivity to a tolerable level at which they can then benefit from psychotherapy. In sum, very little learning comes with drug use. I will explain drugs more in chapter 12. At this point, I can only say that they are about as benign as alcohol was thought to be many decades ago.

There are many serious side effects from chronic tranquilizer use, not the least of which is a strong potential for addiction. I believe it can be helpful to use them for a few weeks to relieve acute distress, Beyond that time, the dangers usually outweigh the benefits. I issue this warning especially to sensors, since your oversensitivity problem is dramatically but illusorily affected by alcohol and drugs."

 

"Chapter 12

Common Medication Approaches

Sensors"

 

"Medications are frequently given to aid people in dealing with acute episodes of anxiety (panic attacks) or to help people who have chronically high levels of anxiety (generalized anxiety disorder) raise their threshold of arousal so they can cope with everyday events without being distracted by their arousal. Some commonly used antianxiety drugs include benzodiazepines such as Xanax (Alprazolam) or Halcion (Triazolam). These drugs are sometimes prescribed with the direction to "take as needed" for acute anxiety episodes. In the case of periodic acute anxiety, longer-acting drugs such as Ativan (lorazepam) or Valium (diazepam) may be prescribed to alter the person's biochemistry and raise his threshold enough to stave off these acute episodes. The idea is that if a sensor's threshold is raised high enough, an experience that would otherwise produce massive anxiety will not be surpassed; therefore, the person will not move out of her comfort zone. In the case of chronic anxiety, the longer-acting drug Buspar (buspirone) is usually given. The medication is generally prescribed for a regular schedule that biochemically maintains the patient's threshold at a higher level."

 

"Side effects of benzodiazepines include daytime sedation and drug hangover, as well as dizziness, uncoordination, lassitude, confusion, delayed physical reaction, disrupted REM (rapid eye movement) sleep and amnesia. These effects can be lethally amplified when the medication is combined with alcohol. However, overall these drugs are safe and rarely lead to cardiovascular or respiratory depression."

 

"Chapter 12

Trendy Drugs"

 

"Occasionally, the new medications appear on the market that cause a stir among the medical and popular community. The usual pattern for these drugs is that they have an aura of being a "miracle pill" and are widely prescribed until their full side effects are revealed. The media usually plays a role in this process, initially publicizing the "wonder drug" at the beginning of its use, then criticizing it and blaming drug companies and physicians alike at the time of its demise - until a newer "miracle pill" appears to steal the limelight. Several drugs in the recent years that have undergone this cycle are Xanax (alprazolam), Halcion (triazolam) and Prozac (fluoxetine)

 

"Xanax is a benzodiazepine that has been widely advertised as the ultimate drug for treating panic disorder. However, Xanax has not demonstrated superiority to other minor tranquilizers and it has similar side effects, including confusion, depression, forgetfulness, paranoia and hostility. Moreover, Xanax binds more tightly to receptors and acts quickly, so it is more likely than other anxiety drugs to cause addiction and intense withdrawal symptoms. Xanax has produced feelings of fear, restlessness, disorientation, and severe anxiety upon its cessation. Combined with alcohol or other sedatives, it may cause death."

 

"Research has revealed that long-term use of Xanax may even lead to higher levels of anxiety and panic, to the extent that patients receiving a placebo did better overall by avoiding the medication and its side effects. Therefore the popularity of this drug as a panacea for panic disorder is highly questionable at the present time."

 

"A frightening potential side effects of long-term usage of benzodiazepines such as Halcion and Xanax is brain atrophy. Some research has indicated that enlarged ventricles (fluid-filled spaces) in the brain have been correlated with long-term benzodiazepine use. Although more research is needed to substantiate this danger, these findings should promote increased caution in the prescribing of these drugs by physicians for long periods of time."

[[Fl...]]

If someone takes a med for 3, 4, 5, years or more, then they surely must have been getting a significant therapeutic benefit from it.  That's why they chose to continue taking it.  So the doc (and by extension the pharma company) are simply filling their appropriate role, treating the patient's condition.  How can you fault the doc for doing exactly what you hired him to do...provide a therapy to help resolve your condition.

 

And if you continued to take a med for months or years and was not getting any benefit, then sorry, IMO, that's on YOU.

 

The fact that someone benefits from taking a drug does not negate the responsibility of the drug companies and medical professionals to properly inform people of the risks of taking their drugs.

 

Had I been informed that it would be possible for me to suffer from debilitating cognitive issues and to have to worry every day about waking up feeling like I have been poisoned 8 years after my last dose of the drug, I never would have taken it. The drug information pamphlet doesn't mention that they can cause years of debilitating illness and my doctor told me the drugs were "safe".

[[Lo...]]

10 THINGS UNINFORMED BENZODIAZEPINE PRESCRIBERS DO

http://benzoinfo.com/2018/06/23/10-things-uninformed-benzodiazepine-prescribers/

[Guest [so...]]

My dr was totally negligent and guilty of extreme malpractice on all these levels :-

 

1. Prescribed me V for muscle spasm for 6 weeks prior to spinal surgery - Negligent because there were so many other less addictive drugs that could have been prescribed and the prescription was outside the therapeutic guidelines of 2-4 weeks.

2. Told me that they were non addictive at such a "low dose/short duration" - Negligent because it has been known for 40  years at least that V is addictive.

3. Did not inform me of any of the dangers asociated with such a class of drug - Negligent, it is a dr's duty to make the patient informed of all potential side effects and consequences of any drug or procedure.

4. Did not how to taper me off safely, in fact did it so quickly I had a stroke (validated by  the neurologist in the hospital) - Negligent, if a dr doesn't know how to help a patient safely taper then they should not be prescribing.

5. When my BP was as high as 220/140 for days prior to the stroke I was told to "tough it out" - Negligence because a dr has a duty of care to assist a patient in that much physiological distress and danger, this particular dr did not even take my BP, 5 days later i had a stroke.

 

This dr's NEGLIGENCE caused me almost to lose my life, to be severely disabled and needing rehabilitation for a number of months whilst still going through BWD (thankfully i have recovered).

This dr's NEGLIGENCE has caused me to have to take a powerful anticoagulant for the rest of my life which has ramifications if i ever need to take other medications or am involved in an accident or need further surgery.

I was completely healthy before taking this evil poison, this dr's NEGLIGENCE has put me and my family through 18 months of sheer hell on earth with no accountability taken.

 

I guess i did derive a certain "benefit" for the 6 weeks i took this poison but the consequences have far outweighed any of that benefit, especially as mentioned, another more appropriate drug could have and should have been given. I did not have the choice to continue taking it as it was no longer needed as the surgery was a complete success.

 

Will i take legal action for malpractice, before this thread i used to think No, i don't want the stress, but now i'm not so sure. What legal action would do for me would be to ask this dr to be accountable for her inappropriate prescribing and the cascade of medical chaos that followed. And before someone chimes in to tell me that i "must have had prior heart issues etc" I was cleared both pre and post op for any cardiovascular disease and none whatsoever was found.

 

Pure and simple negligence and malpractice.

 

[[Lo...]]

...and my fundamental question remains the same (and apparently unanswered  )

 

So did you not see an obvious, positive, therapeutic effect?  And if they did not benefit you, why did you continue to take them?

 

Apparently, there is no antidote for the damage they had done to me, so I continue to take them because I would die otherwise and my mother would not have a place to live anymore and would probably die from grief and broken-heartedness and not having a place to live at anymore. I don't think mothers should have to bury their children, ever, so that is the only reason I stay alive. I have given up on myself long time ago.

 

I got too depressed and angry earlier in the day. No, I haven't given up on myself. There are people that I care about deeply and people that have helped me so much through this and I owe them gratitude forever. And personally, I always considered benzos to be something of a necessary evil, but the more I suffer trying to taper off, the more I question whether I needed them in the first place. Yes, they were therapeutic (although it's been so long since I felt any genuine anxiety/panic relief), but were also toxic to me at the same time, and as liberty said, drugs lie, and it is often very hard to distinguish what is a therapeutic and what is a toxic effect and whether a therapeutic and a toxic effect are actually overlapping in many ways. For me personally, anything over 0.5mg Ativan in a single day was toxic. But it took going through this hell to understand this personal truth.

 

Frankly, I am so happy to be stepping off valium. Yes, it saved me from ativan interdose withdrawal nightmare, but it's increased my depression so much that I have hard time seeing how it can help others lessen depression. I believe it can help some. I just have hard time imagining it.  All I wanted/want to do on valium is to play Leonard Cohen CD's and keep sobbing

 

[[Da...]]

...and my fundamental question remains the same (and apparently unanswered  )

 

So did you not see an obvious, positive, therapeutic effect?  And if they did not benefit you, why did you continue to take them?

 

builder, nobody can turn back the hands of time even if they wanted to.  Do you mind answering what your emoji expresses?

 

Well, I guess it expresses a kind of confusion, or amazement!

 

.  If someone takes a med for 3, 4, 5, years or more, then they surely must have been getting a significant therapeutic benefit from it.  That's why they chose to continue taking it.  So the doc (and by extension the pharma company) are simply filling their appropriate role, treating the patient's condition.  How can you fault the doc for doing exactly what you hired him to do...provide a therapy to help resolve your condition.

 

And if you continued to take a med for months or years and was not getting any benefit, then sorry, IMO, that's on YOU.

 

This is a pretty bizarre statement to make. I guess it never occurred to you that some people attempted to withdrawal from the drug many times, but the results were much too frightening and physically debilitating for them to succeed? Not everyone can afford to become physically disabled for a year or more at any time in their life. And how were they to know that they would ever recover if they continued on stopping the drug if they didn't have the proper information? If someone's sleep shrinks down to almost nothing and they begin to lose weight rapidly when they stop the drug, they may just rightfully conclude that it's extremely dangerous, and that they would rather take the drug than die. It does not mean they want to take it or that they are deriving therapeutic benefit from it.

 

David Juurlink had an article on opioids stating that the primary benefit many people experience from opioids after taking them for a few months is simply to avoid experiencing withdrawal effects.  http://www.cmaj.ca/content/189/39/E1222

 

Similarly, in a report issuing guidance on benzodiazepine prescriptions, it's been written that "Dependence to benzodiazepines is recognised as a significant risk in patients receiving treatment for longer than one month. Continuing treatment may only assist in preventing withdrawal symptoms which include insomnia, anxiety and agitation." This report was written by professor Michael Barry, a clinical pharmacologist.  https://www.hse.ie/eng/about/who/cspd/ncps/medicines-management/bzra-for-anxiety-insomnia/bzraguidancemmpfeb18.pdf

 

Many people continued taking them for years because their doctors failed to provide them with the appropriate information initially, and then failed to help them understand how to withdraw later. It's a disgrace to the medical profession and the empathy expressed by people who allowed it to happen is totally vacuous. These observations about benzos were already available. They know how to find medical information to help their patients, but decided it wasn't worth the effort. Many patients cannot read and understand medical info, and even if they can, their health and cognition may be too poor to find and digest it once their analytical skills and motivation have been atrophied by years of benzo use, often with additional drugging to "help" their problems induced by the initial drugging. There is no excuse for prescribing a drug to patients you don't understand, watching their health deteriorate, and STILL failing to learn about the drug you prescribed.

 

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate that you help people so much with their tapers, but it's almost like you've been on this site for so long that you've forgotten literally the most crucial element of benzo pharmacology. For some people it's almost impossible to stop.

[[Le...]]

Loraz - Thank you for posting those excerpts from a book published in 1994!  I am just so pissed that no one is doing anything about this well documented (but not well known) medical malpractice. So be it if I kicked get off BB for saying so.  I am suffering like many of us and could quite possibly lose my marriage and family over this.