Suppose that you were an accident victim, and you found that the doctor’s diagnosis of your injury showed the absence of significant information in your medical history. Suppose that were an injured victim, and you experienced added discomfort when using the medication that had been suggested by the treating physician. What could you do in either of those cases?
Why an accident victim might have concerns about the initial diagnosis of a sustained injury
• Has a feeling that there might be “holes” in that diagnosis; suspects that the doctor might have overlooked certain possibilities.
• Unsure that diagnosis reflects the injury’s nature or severity
• Not clear how offered diagnosis has addressed the presence of several injuries
Why a treated victim might have qualms about the doctor’s prescribed treatment
• Victim/patient has struggled to fit the treatment into his or her daily routine.
• The treatment does not seem to be working.
• The outcome does not seem assured, even though the remedy is expensive; moreover, there appears to be no guarantee of reimbursement from the insurance company.
• It appears to be an experimental remedy Is it possible that the insurance company might refuse to cover the costs associated with an untested healing method?
• It appears to be an outdated treatment; there are newer options available.
• The doctor has not arranged for a follow-up appointment.
Some victims might want a second opinion. How should any of them seek to obtain the opinion of a different physician?
It is best to hire the services of a personal injury lawyer in Kitchener to schedule a meeting with one or more qualified physicians
—Seek recommendations from friends and co-workers
—Research online for the names of doctors to consider
–Do not expect the treating physician to recommend a different doctor, unless the victim should see a specialist, or plans to move to a different location.
Realize how the system works: The insurance company might not approve of plans to schedule an appointment, in order to acquire a second opinion.
However, if the victim were in need of a specialist’s care, then the insurance company would not have a sound reason for rejecting utilization of a second opinion.
Be ready to pay for that second opinion; there is no guarantee that the insurance company would agree to cover the cost of that supplementary appointment. A health insurance provider might pay for that second opinion, if the treatment suggested initially had called for carrying out an invasive treatment, such as a surgical operation.
Understand that the insurance company might ask you to attend an independent medical examination (IME). You could refuse to go, if you lacked transportation to the chosen location. In that case, money from the insurance company’s coffers would have to be used, in order to cover a means of transportation.