Rebuttal - Hare

14           MS. BARLOW:  On rebuttal we'd call Dr. Brad Hare.

 

         15           THE COURT:  Dr. Hare, step up, please.  Raise your

 

         16  right hand and face the clerk.

 

         17                        BRADFORD HARE,

 

         18           being first duly sworn, was examined and

 

         19           testified as follows:

 

         20           THE COURT:  State your name and spell the last name,

 

         21  please.

 

         22           THE WITNESS:  My name is Bradford D. Hare, H A R E.

 

         23                DIRECT EXAMINATION (Rebuttal)

 

         24  BY  MS. BARLOW:

 

         25  Q.  Dr. Hare, good morning.  Thank you for returning.  Are

 

          1  you familiar with the graphic charts that show temperature,

 

          2  pulse, respiration, blood pressure, that sort of thing in the

 

          3  medical records of these patients?

 

          4  A.  Yes, I am.

 

          5  Q.  I'm going to put up a chart of seven days for Mary Crane

 

          6  up here.

 

          7           THE COURT:  Does that have an exhibit number?

 

          8           MS. BARLOW:  Yes.  It is 279, Your Honor.

 

          9  Q.  (BY MS. BARLOW)  Have you seen a chart such as this in

 

         10  the medical records?

 

         11  A.  Yes, I have.

 

         12  Q.  Can you describe the manner in which the respiration rate

 

         13  was -- well, all the vital signs were taken, or recorded, I

 

         14  should say, documented?

 

         15  A.  The chart would show the days, the dates, at the very

 

         16  top.  So each of the segments underneath that date would

 

         17  represent a 24 hour period.  And then the various points or

 

         18  numbers charted can be traced back up to the top and

 

         19  approximated as to when that bit of information was charted.

 

         20  Q.  Charting in this manner, is that a good indicator of the

 

         21  effects of psychotropic drugs or analgesics drugs on a

 

         22  patient?

 

         23  A.  It certainly can be.

 

         24  Q.  And why is that?

 

         25  A.  Well, again, these medications have the potential to

 

          1  alter the state of consciousness, alter blood pressure, alter

 

          2  breathing.  I think under the influence of these medications

 

          3  it's very important to chart this type of information.  If

 

          4  the patient is very mildly affected by them --

 

          5           MR. BUGDEN:  I think he's answered the question.

 

          6           THE COURT:  Sustained.

 

          7  Q.  (BY MS. BARLOW)  Is there any reason for the charting

 

          8  being twice a day?

 

          9  A.  I think it depends on the circumstances.  If the effects

 

         10  of medicines are minimal, twice a day is probably fine.  If

 

         11  the patient's level of consciousness is altered, in other

 

         12  words if the patient is noted to do be unresponsive,

 

         13  lethargic, then these vital signs need to be monitored much

 

         14  more than that.

 

         15  Q.  Why is that?

 

         16  A.  Again, along with the state of consciousness, there's

 

         17  much more likely effect on blood pressure, breathing, and the

 

         18  various vital signs are much more likely to be affected.

 

         19  This is a standard way of monitoring medications.

 

         20  Q.  If the chartings do not show a respiration or a heart

 

         21  rate going down towards the end of a person's life, what does

 

         22  that mean to you as a physician?

 

         23  A.  Umm, there can be various meanings to that.  At least

 

         24  part of that, you know, could be that the body begins to kick

 

         25  in compensatory mechanisms, kind of life saving mechanisms to

 

          1  try and keep the blood pressure and the heart rate up under

 

          2  adverse circumstances.  So those things may not change that

 

          3  much under circumstances where the patient is very adversely

 

          4  affected by medications.  At the same time it's important to

 

          5  trace those, to keep track of them.

 

          6  Q.  When you say keep track of them, are you talking about

 

          7  more than twice a day?

 

          8  A.  Yes.

 

          9           MR. BUGDEN:  Objection.  Leading.

 

         10           THE COURT:  Sustained.  And stricken.

 

         11  Q.  (BY MS. BARLOW)  Are you aware of the standard of care

 

         12  for monitoring people who are on central nervous system

 

         13  depressants?

 

         14  A.  Yes.

 

         15  Q.  What is that standard of care?

 

         16  A.  To monitor them often enough to ensure the safety of the

 

         17  effects of those medications.

 

         18  Q.  Would that change -- how would that impact doing it twice

 

         19  a day?

 

         20  A.  If there was very little effect to make a patient sleepy

 

         21  or to change a patient's activity with medicines, twice a day

 

         22  is probably okay.  If, on the other hand, a patient is

 

         23  lethargic, unresponsive, you know, even approaching almost a

 

         24  general anesthetic state, as an anesthesiologist we monitor

 

         25  those patients every five minutesOf course, in a psych

 

          1  ward that's obviously not practical, but certainly monitoring

 

          2  more than every 12 hours is very much indicated and would be

 

          3  the standard of care.

 

          4           MS. BARLOW:  Thank you.  That's all I have.

 

          5           THE COURT:  Cross-examine.

 

          6                 CROSS-EXAMINATION (Rebuttal)

 

          7  BY MR. BUGDEN:

 

          8  Q.  (BY MR. BUGDEN)  Dr. Hare, do you understand that as

 

          9  relates to Mary Crane, you would agree that her vital signs

 

         10  on this graphic chart are not consistent with morphine

 

         11  overdose?  Her vital signs do not show respiratory

 

         12  depression?

 

         13  A.  Well, the respiratory rate is one indication.

 

         14  Q.  But that wasn't my question.

 

         15           THE COURT:  Please listen to the question.

 

         16  Q.  (BY MR. BUGDEN)  Her respiratory rate is not depressed on

 

         17  this graphic chart?

 

         18  A.  That's right.

 

         19  Q.  Her other vital signs, blood pressure, heart rate, they

 

         20  are not depressed on this graphic chart, isn't that true?

 

         21  A.  Only the time that this is monitored, yes.

 

         22  Q.  And you testified last week that what you would expect if

 

         23  you had a morphine overdose would be that the vital signs,

 

         24  respiratory rate, heart rate, blood pressure, that those

 

         25  things would show a depressed effect, wasn't that your

 

          1  testimony last week, Doctor?

 

          2  A.  It depends on the circumstances.  The acute effects of

 

          3  morphine would be to show those sorts of effects.  The more

 

          4  chronic damaging effects of morphine, the accumulation of

 

          5  other drugs, all bets are off what you're going to say.

 

          6  Q.  All bets are off.  With Mary Crane, for example, is the

 

          7  gist of your testimony that although we have graphic evidence

 

          8  over a period of days, and it being charted every 12 hours,

 

          9  that although every 12 hours her vital signs are not

 

         10  consistent with morphine overdose, is the gist of your

 

         11  testimony that somehow in between the charting there was a

 

         12  life threatening event and a life threatening depressed

 

         13  effect on her respiratory and other vital signs and it's just

 

         14  that she phased right out of it so that at the moment that

 

         15  she was charted everything was fine again?

 

         16  A.  I guess we don't know, because it wasn't charted.

 

         17  Q.  But isn't that the gist of what you're trying to imply to

 

         18  the jury?

 

         19  A.  I'm staying there isn't enough information charted to be

 

         20  able to safely -- to say that these medications were given

 

         21  safely.

 

         22  Q.  Judith Larsen, remember that patient?

 

         23  A.  Yes.

 

         24  Q.  Are you aware from the records that after she received a

 

         25  trial dose of morphine, Dr. Weitzel charted that he saw pain,

 

          1  was going to try morphine to see if that improved her

 

          2  condition; and on the very first day he gave Judith Larsen

 

          3  morphine, or ordered morphine for that patient, that she

 

          4  then -- her alertness increased?

 

          5           MS. BARLOW:  Objection.  That's not in these charts.

 

          6           THE COURT:  Sustained.

 

          7           MR. BUGDEN:  It's in the medical records

 

          8           THE COURT:  You can refer to the medical records as

 

          9  long as you identify them.

 

         10  Q.  (BY MR. BUGDEN)  Haven't you seen that in the medical

 

         11  records?

 

         12  A.  Yes.

 

         13  Q.  So she received a morphine dose and then became more

 

         14  alert after that morphine dose and was able to actually watch

 

         15  a movie?

 

         16  A.  As I remember, those were two milligram doses of

 

         17  morphine, yes.

 

         18  Q.  Okay.  So your supposition with regard to the depressant

 

         19  effects of the morphine with regard to Mary Crane, for

 

         20  example, is that in the middle of the shift you suspect that

 

         21  perhaps Mary Crane, for example, with this graphic chart, may

 

         22  have had some life threatening problems, but the measurements

 

         23  you agree did return to the normal range at every 12 hours

 

         24  that they were checked, is that right?

 

         25  A.  I think what I'm saying is that the monitoring was

 

          1  inadequate.  I don't know what went on between.  It could

 

          2  have.  But the monitoring is inadequate.  That's my point.

 

          3  Q.  But you don't know what went on in between so you

 

          4  certainly can't say, to a degree of reasonable medical

 

          5  certainty, that this was a life threatening effect caused by

 

          6  a morphine overdose in between the two 12 hour checks of the

 

          7  vitals, you can't say that?

 

          8  A.  No, I can't say that.

 

          9           MR. BUGDEN:  Thank you.  That's all I have.

 

         10           MS. BARLOW:  No further questions, Your Honor.

 

         11           THE COURT:  You may step down.

 

         12           MS. BARLOW:  We have no further witnesses, Your

 

         13  Honor.

 

         14           THE COURT:  Ladies and gentlemen, that concludes the

 

         15  evidence in this case.

<<Back to Home Page