Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2 3
Reply To Thread

Paranoia? Who, me?Follow

#1 Mar 09 2006 at 5:39 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
18,463 posts
Quote:
Woman sues Walgreens for `crazy' label
Remarks appear on prescription printout


By Missy Stoddard, Tribune Newspapers. South Florida Sun-Sentinel; Tribune reporter Ameet Sachdev contributed to this story
Published March 9, 2006



For years, Janey Karp has battled depression and anxiety with the help of prescription drugs. Though millions of Americans do the same, Karp admits she is intensely private and can't help but feel stigmatized for needing medication to feel normal.

So when the 53-year-old Palm Beach, Fla., resident read the Walgreens printout attached to her prescription last week for the sleep aid Ambien, she couldn't believe her eyes.

Typed in a field reserved for patient information and dated March 17, 2005, was "CrAzY!!" In another field, dated Sept. 30, 2004, it read: "She's really a psycho!!! Do not say her name too loud, never mention her meds by names & try to talk to her when ... "

The information continued onto another page, which was not attached.

"I was devastated, humiliated and embarrassed," Karp said. "I honestly couldn't speak. I was trembling."

Karp filed suit Tuesday against Deerfield-based Walgreen Co., accusing it of defamation, negligent supervision and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Walgreens is investigating, said company spokeswoman Carol Hively, who added that computers are accessible to pharmacists and pharmacy technicians. She said Walgreens does not know if the notes were entered by employees in Florida or Connecticut, where Karp lived previously.

"The drug-utilization review includes a notes field intended for the pharmacist to use to enter reminders and patient requests," Hively said. "We want to ensure that our pharmacy employees are acting in a proper and professional manner, so we are looking into this matter."

For Karp, seeing the printout underscored her long-held fears of being labeled for taking medication to stabilize her moods.

"I'm thinking they're thinking, `Here comes psycho,' that they're laughing at me as I come in the store," she said. "I had enough trouble picking these [medications] up in the first place."

While preparing for a trip to Los Angeles, Karp had a friend go to her local Walgreens to pick up the Ambien. Attached was the page with the comments.

Karp's friend immediately contacted Walgreens and left a voice mail on an 800 number. Someone from Walgreens called back first thing the next morning and "apologized profusely," noting that the comments never should have been written.

Karp's lawyer, Cathy Lively, said she made more than a dozen phone calls to Walgreens, all to no avail. She said she received "a very generic `We'll investigate.'"

Since the notes have been in the computer since at least September 2004, the date of the first entry, it's anyone's guess how many Walgreens employees have read them, Lively said.

Countless other Walgreens customers unknowingly could be in the same situation as Karp, said Lively.

"There a lot of medications with stigmas and sensitivities," she said. "A man taking Viagra--what are they going to be labeled?"


They just dialed her crazy up to 11.
#2 Mar 09 2006 at 5:47 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
That's funny. A friend and I were talking the other day about ad campaigns for psychoactive drugs. I suggested the use of Patsy Cline's "Crazy".

Crazy.... I'm crazy for feelin' so lonely... crazy for feelin' so blue....
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#3 Mar 09 2006 at 6:15 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Could imagine if they called her a CrAzY Jew?

Smiley: eek
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#4 Mar 09 2006 at 6:19 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,101 posts
Quote:
Typed in a field reserved for patient information and dated March 17, 2005, was "CrAzY!!" In another field, dated Sept. 30, 2004, it read: "She's really a psycho!!! Do not say her name too loud, never mention her meds by names & try to talk to her when ... "...

"I was devastated, humiliated and embarrassed," Karp said. "I honestly couldn't speak. I was trembling."

Karp filed suit Tuesday against Deerfield-based Walgreen Co., accusing it of defamation, negligent supervision and intentional infliction of emotional distress...

"The drug-utilization review includes a notes field intended for the pharmacist to use to enter reminders and patient requests," Hively said. "We want to ensure that our pharmacy employees are acting in a proper and professional manner, so we are looking into this matter."

For Karp, seeing the printout underscored her long-held fears of being labeled for taking medication to stabilize her moods.

"I'm thinking they're thinking, `Here comes psycho,' that they're laughing at me as I come in the store," she said. "I had enough trouble picking these [medications] up in the first place."



Well DUH! You are crazy lady.Smiley: lol I used to work in a drug store and remember people just like this.

I don't see how this is defamation of character though. It's not like this is supposed to be seen by anyone other then pharmacy personnel. I'm sure the message wasn't meant with malicious intent either, but rather as a warning to all people who help her. I'm sure she would be pissed if a pharmacist didn't see this message and spoke her name loudly along with her medication.
#5 Mar 09 2006 at 6:23 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,101 posts
Also ... it's ironically funny that while this woman’s intention was to keep a hidden lifestyle, with her current lawsuit even people on gaming forums knows she's a loon.
#6 Mar 09 2006 at 6:24 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Not that I agree with the Walgreen's folk calling people "crazy" in l33t speak but the real irony here is that she was so mortally embarassed that a handful of Walgreen's employees might know she's loopy that she made it into a national news story Smiley: laugh
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#7 Mar 09 2006 at 6:27 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,101 posts
HA HA! I beat you!
#8 Mar 09 2006 at 6:38 PM Rating: Good
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,636 posts
Similar thing happened with a Blockbuster receipt last year. Well, technically it wasn't a receipt, it was a customer history printout, which we're not supposed to show the customer.

There's a valid use for those comments, like "don't say her name too loud, don't say the name of her meds." Shows they're actually being thoughtful (or fearful) of her. And at blockbuster, we use them to say "this person is a scammer" or "no more credits" or "hearing impaired" or "extremely rude," etc. so you know what to deal with when you bring up the account.

Quote:
"I'm thinking they're thinking, `Here comes psycho,' that they're laughing at me as I come in the store," she said. "I had enough trouble picking these [medications] up in the first place."

If the employees are all thinking that, it's not because some comment on her files said so. It's because her behavior is bad enough to warrant that comment, and they remember her for it.


I just don't really see the legal grounds for this.

#9 Mar 09 2006 at 6:41 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,101 posts
trickybeck wrote:



I just don't really see the legal grounds for this.


Yes but, you're not a fuc[black][/black]kin' loon.
#10 Mar 09 2006 at 6:49 PM Rating: Good
*****
18,463 posts
I think the complaint has to do more with the fact that her friend (who presumably knew she took meds, since she picked them up) got to see all kinds of commentary about her illness that health care professionals have an ethical responsibility to keep private. Walgreens has to suck it up. It was extrememly unprofessional.

Edited, Thu Mar 9 18:53:30 2006 by Atomicflea
#11 Mar 09 2006 at 6:52 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
fenderputy the Shady wrote:
HA HA! I beat you!
S'alright. I'm just going to rate you sub-default so it looks like I said it first.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#13 Mar 09 2006 at 7:34 PM Rating: Good
****
4,596 posts
Quote:
It was extrememly unprofessional.


Unprofessional yes, but illegal? I have a hard time buying that. It's not defamation of character if it's true, or if the person saying it believed it to be true.
____________________________
Nicroll 65 Assassin
Teltorid 52 Druid
Aude Sapere

Oh hell camp me all you want f**kers. I own this site and thus I own you. - Allakhazam
#14 Mar 09 2006 at 7:37 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
There's also the question of intent. Obviously the pharmacist, or aide, or whoever didn't intend for the friend or for that matter the customer to see that internal note. It was a mistake.

**** happens, take your Ambien and move past it.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#15 Mar 09 2006 at 7:53 PM Rating: Good
Lord xythex wrote:
Unprofessional yes, but illegal?
Civil court != Criminal court. Something does not have to be "illegal" to sue someone over. They just have to ***** and moan enough. Smiley: wink2
#17 Mar 09 2006 at 8:13 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
10,802 posts
With the rising cost of prescription meds, if I were her, I'd just use this to get my meds for free for the next few years.
#18 Mar 09 2006 at 8:15 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Samira wrote:
There's also the question of intent. Obviously the pharmacist, or aide, or whoever didn't intend for the friend or for that matter the customer to see that internal note. It was a mistake.

**** happens, take your Ambien and move past it.


As a couple people have already pointed out, this is a civil suit, not a legal charge. Patient information is confidential. It wasn't wrong or harmful for them to have written the information. It was wrong *and* harmful for them to have printed it and handed it out.

Intent really doesn't enter into it. If I accidentally run someone over with my car, I'm still civily liable for the damages I caused, even if I did nothing illegal. Clearly, Walgreens made a mistake. Those notes should never have been printed out. Clearly, they were. Thus, they are civily liable for that action and any damage it may have done.


In the case of a woman who's already got fears about being labeled as "crazy", I don't think it'll be difficult to show harm in this case. Not sure how much she'll get, but I'd be amazed if she doesn't get some settlement out of this.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#19 Mar 09 2006 at 8:20 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,919 posts
There's a lesson here. Always refer to your problem customers not by the "c" word. instead , i prefer to use the term ************* insane" since it is sooo much more accurate in most cases.
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#20 Mar 09 2006 at 9:20 PM Rating: Decent
****
4,596 posts
I'm disappointed that so many people find merit in this case. BooHoo, someone said something bad about you. Sticks and stones can break your bones, but if you don't like what your pharmacy has to say about you, go somewhere else.
____________________________
Nicroll 65 Assassin
Teltorid 52 Druid
Aude Sapere

Oh hell camp me all you want f**kers. I own this site and thus I own you. - Allakhazam
#22 Mar 09 2006 at 10:08 PM Rating: Good
Walgreens could SO get out of this easily. All they have to do si give her the "right" pills close to the court date. Anything that causes paranoia should do the trick. She'll win their suit for them at that point.
#23 Mar 09 2006 at 10:57 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
She'll likely get some "pain and suffering" settlement, probably in lieu of a trial unless she pushes for that. However punitive damages will be hard to get unless she can offer some evidence that the insult or injury was deliberate or reckless.

Could go either way. Juries tend not to be terribly sympathetic to people who are mentally rather than physically disabled... but you never know.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#24 Mar 10 2006 at 12:04 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,919 posts
Just for the record, us being out to get people is highly exagerated.
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#26 Mar 10 2006 at 8:32 AM Rating: Good
*****
18,463 posts
Baron von AngstyCoder wrote:
Lord xythex wrote:
I'm disappointed that so many people find merit in this case. BooHoo, someone said something bad about you. Sticks and stones can break your bones, but if you don't like what your pharmacy has to say about you, go somewhere else.


You've apparently never been in a persistant state of on the edge, where someone's words wound you deeper than anything else.

I can cause a good deal of damage to myself purposefully, and feel it less than humiliation. Humilation flashes me back to times in my life I'd rather not think about. Such that I would probably rather be sent on a long walk off a short pier than have to RELIVE THEM ALL OVER AGAIN. No, I can't just think about them for more than a blink of an eye, I flash back to them and am forced to feel it all over again.

And that's pretty much what it comes down to. If you're in the medical field, priority #1 is to take care of the patient. The mistake wasn't in putting helpful commentary in her file, such as "Customer would like ultimate discretion, please do not name meds or offer commentary", it was in the fact that folks that are paid to fill out her prescriptions took the time to mock her in writing for what they felt was a humorous situation and quite obviously, she doesn't find it so. If you're going to be such an *** as to make fun of someone for behavior they can't control, for crying out loud, don't document it in their personal file.

I'm sure the lawsuit is mostly to make sure this never happens again. It's a fulfillment of every paranoid thought she must have ever held, and can't have helped her illness at all. To say that she should "just get over it" is projecting. This meant something to her. She has the right to sue in civil court, and she's exercising that right.
« Previous 1 2 3
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 376 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (376)