Autopsies are the Exception, Not the Rule

Coroners cutting corners... "Don't ask, don't tell" coroner's reporting

Remember a prime-time TV show called Quincy from back in the
late 1970s?

It starred Jack Klugman, and was about a medical examiner
who solved crimes (usually murders, of course) using medical
evidence obtained from autopsies of the victims. It was the
original made-for-TV forensics show, the forgotten precursor
of the ultra-successful CSI series that's all the rage these
days. My point in mentioning this program is to focus your
attention on a fundamental (and indispensable) tool of
medicine that's rapidly going the way of the dinosaur: The
autopsy.

Why should you be MORE aware of such an unpleasant thing as
slicing up a corpse? Because autopsies are one of the most
important ways in which doctors learn things about medicine
and health - whether it be a green med student learning
basic anatomy in medical school or a veteran medical
examiner detecting the earliest warnings of a possible
outbreak of a bacterial epidemic. In truth, without
autopsies, we wouldn't be anywhere near as far along
medically as we are today.

But where autopsies were once a matter of routine in the
majority of deaths - especially those occurring outside the
four walls of a hospital - nowadays they're the exception,
not the rule. According to a recent New York Times (yes, I
read it) report, it's likely that less than 5% of all deaths
are followed by an autopsy in this day and age. That means
an awful lot of assumptions are being made about what's
causing the remaining 95% of people to die - and in many
cases, they're DEAD WRONG...

Case in point: A recent "heart attack" victim (as determined
by a coroner) was found to have actually died of BACTERIAL
MENENGITIS, a severely contagious infection that could have
spread to others before the man's death. Without the autopsy
a curious forensic pathologist performed on the body, these
potential victims might never have known they'd come into
contact with a carrier of the disease - and could have
started an epidemic, had one or more of them been infected!
Luckily, they weren't.  

Some doctors may argue that MRIs and other high-tech imaging
technologies eliminate the need for formal autopsies in many
cases. But that's an illusion, in my opinion - and research
agrees with me. According to some studies, autopsies reveal
missed or incorrect diagnoses in ONE OUT OF FOUR hospital
deaths.

By now, you're probably asking: WHY aren't autopsies
routinely performed anymore? Well, the sinister answer won't
surprise you, if you've been a reader of mine for any length
of time. Keep reading...

***********************************************
"Don't ask, don't tell" coroner's reporting

What's the biggest reason autopsies are rarely performed
nowadays? Liability.

You see, were autopsies routine, their findings would call
into glaring relief the frequency of misdiagnoses (or
mistreatment) on the part of hospitals and emergency
medicine providers. In other words, they'd definitively
expose the mistakes modern medicine makes which sometimes
end up harming or killing us. What does skipping the
autopsies really mean to hospitals?

Avoiding expensive malpractice lawsuits.

That's right - by forgoing autopsies in all but a select few
cases, they're able to get away with sweeping their mistakes
right under the rug. Once again, it's dollars versus sense
in mainstream medicine! Don't the relatives of the deceased
have the right to know exactly WHY their loved ones have
died? And shouldn't hospitals be held accountable for those
deaths in which they're truly culpable?

Don't get me wrong, here - I'm not for more lawsuits by any
means. God knows there are already too many frivolous
malpractice suits on the court dockets right now. I'm just
saying that medical care for everyone will improve if
hospitals are forced to contend with (and learn from) their
diagnostic and treatment mistakes...

So they won't repeat them on you or someone you love.