Peter Sachner obtained a defendant’s decision in a binding arbitration of a medical malpractice / wrongful death case submitted to Judge Holzberg as sole arbitrator. Evidence was presented at a formal hearing over a two-week period, which concerned the tragic case of a 20-year-old who committed suicide by self-inflicted gunshot a few hours following his presentation at a Connecticut community hospital for a question of intentional drug overdose. The patient was evaluated by co-defendant hospital personnel and the defendant emergency medicine attending physician, an employee of the physician’s group represented by Sachner. He was deemed not to be an imminent risk of harm to himself or others, and not in need of immediate care in a psychiatric facility, and consequently was discharged with an agreed-upon plan for admission to a 28-day substance abuse treatment program at a rehabilitation center. Before entering this treatment program, however, and within hours of his discharge from the emergency department, the patient tragically took his own life.
The plaintiff contended that the defendants deviated from the standard of care by failing to adequately identify the patient’s suicidal intent, essentially ignoring “red flags” that should have alerted them to the risk of imminent harm to the patient, and by failing to take appropriate measures to protect him from life-threatening harm. The defendants argued that they satisfied the standard of care insofar as they undertook a thorough and comprehensive medical and psychiatric evaluation of the patient, including an extensive psychosocial / suicide risk assessment, and that under the applicable Connecticut statutes (namely C.G.S. §§ 17a-502 and 17a-495), the patient did not meet the criteria for an emergency commitment to an inpatient psychiatric facility. Rather, as the evidence showed, the patient had a serious polysubstance abuse issue, which had not been previously treated, and for which he needed intensive treatment at a rehabilitation center. The defendants also argued that the patient’s suicide was simply not reasonably foreseeable, and that no one – including his own family – could have anticipated it. Eight days of evidence and testimony were presented by both sides, including testimony (often very emotional) by numerous family members, the involved clinicians, and multiple experts in different specialties. Following this, the Arbitrator — noting that although this was a profoundly sad and disturbing case, the very nature of suicide is unpredictable — ultimately concluded that the defendants’ evaluation, care and treatment of the patient satisfied the standard of care, and therefore determined that there was no malpractice committed. In her closing, the plaintiff asked the Arbitrator to return an award in the amount of $5 million. The Arbitrator awarded judgment in favor of the defendants.