Do I have a legal right to seek action against a doctor for diagnosing me with glaucoma and then treating me for only a year?

I was diagnosed 11 years ago. After a year of treating me, he said I didn’t have glaucoma and refused to refill my eye drops he had perscribed me. I believe it was because he did not except medi-cal and when I started seeing him at first I had insurance. Then 5 months ago, I saw an opthomoligist because I was unable to see completely out of my left eye. He asked me if I was ever diagnosed with glaucoma and I told him what happened and he proceeded to let me know my blindness was a result of him not continuing the medication. I requested my medical records from the other doctor and they informed me they had none; all they had was a letter they had sent me back then that was returned to them.

Asked on June 19, 2012 under Malpractice Law, California


SJZ, Member, New York Bar / FreeAdvice Contributing Attorney

Answered 8 years ago | Contributor

Malpractice could be found from a doctor misdiagnosing a condition (at any point--for example, mistakenly concluding that you did not have glaucoma after having already been treating you); it could also be found from a failure to provide or continue the correct treatment. The issue is what  the "reasonable" well-trained doctor would do; if the reasonable doctor would not have acted like this one did, then you may have a malpractice claim. From what you write, it would be worthwhile to speak with a malpractice attorney about your situation.

IMPORTANT NOTICE: The Answer(s) provided above are for general information only. The attorney providing the answer was not serving as the attorney for the person submitting the question or in any attorney-client relationship with such person. Laws may vary from state to state, and sometimes change. Tiny variations in the facts, or a fact not set forth in a question, often can change a legal outcome or an attorney's conclusion. Although has verified the attorney was admitted to practice law in at least one jurisdiction, he or she may not be authorized to practice law in the jurisdiction referred to in the question, nor is he or she necessarily experienced in the area of the law involved. Unlike the information in the Answer(s) above, upon which you should NOT rely, for personal advice you can rely upon we suggest you retain an attorney to represent you.