Malpractice or criminal?

Jeffery Parks

Dr. Jeffery Parks is a board certified general surgeon working in Cleveland who writes regulary at Buckeye Surgeon.

More from The Buckeye Surgeon

The Cleveland Plain Dealer reports on the story of Eric Cropp, a local ex-pharmacist, who recently plead no contest to involuntary manslaughter in the tragic death of a 2 year old girl under his care. The child, Emily Jerry, was being treated for cancer at Cleveland’s Rainbow Babies and Children’s Hospital. A pharmacy technician had mistakenly prepared Emily’s chemotherapy medicine in a hypertonic solution of saline. Eric Cropp, the supervising pharmacist on duty that day, had signed off on the preparation. Emily Jerry slipped into a coma and subsequently died (Also read MedCity News’ A 2-year-old. A death. A pharmacist facing jail. What will spur lasting change?).

As a result of the incident, the Ohio legislature passed what is now known as “Emily’s Law”, which provided quality control guidelines for pharmacy technicians. Prior to the law, people could obtain employment in a pharmacy lab with barely a high school diploma. Reassuring, no? The pharmacy technician in this case, Katie Dudash, was granted immunity in return for testifying against her boss, Eric Cropp. Mr. Cropp now faces sentencing (maximum 5 years in prison) on July 17th.


A case like this is obviously tragic and unnecessary. This Cropp character was undeniably negligent and unprofessional to the extent that he was the one ultimately responsible for making sure that that little girl got the correct medicine. But I have to admit, I was initially taken aback when I read that he was being prosecuted as a criminal. He wasn’t drunk or impaired. He wasn’t even the one who prepared the mixture. He was inattentive and lazy and careless, and now he faces the real possibility of serving jailtime as a consequence. He’s a pharmacist, not a doctor, but the implication and precedent is clear– health care professionals are not immune to the prospect of a criminal trial .

Generally, medical malpractice is litigated as a civil tort. In civil cases, as opposed to criminal suits, the alleged victim brings the lawsuit for the purpose of remedying perceived damages sustained via monetary compensation. In criminal cases, the State is the plaintiff. The core elements of a successful medical malpractice suit include: an owed duty (physician/patient relationship), breach of duty (the act of malpractice), injury sustained (the negligence leads to a complication), and damages suffered. The plaintiff must prove all four elements in order to win the case. For example, let’s say your surgeon nicks your bile duct during a routine lap chole, but is able to successfully identify and repair it at the same operation. That’s a lawsuit you won’t win because you’ve only really proven 1 of the 4 elements (injury sustained). The sole purpose of medical malpractice (as trial lawyers will gladly tell you) is to reimburse an injured patient for negligence and to encourage health care professionals (via the negative feedback mechanism of a million dollar lawsuit) to better govern themselves, i.e physicians who have been successfully sued multiple times for medical malpractice presumably will then show up on the radar of the state licensing boards and face loss of practice privileges.

Doctors face potential criminal charges more commonly for procedural violations such as medicare fraud and selling narcotics prescriptions. Criminal prosecution for medical malpractice, on the other hand, is extremely rare in the United States, but maybe that’s starting to change; more than half of the criminal cases since 1809 have been filed since 1984. When we talk about criminal conduct, there are two main components: actus reus (guilty act) and mens rea (guilty mind). Mens rea deals with the perpetrator’s state of mind, specifically his intent. Criminal prosecution of medical malpractice includes mens rea as the fifth component that must be proven.

In California in 1996, Wolfgang Schug MD saw an 11 month old child in the ER, diagnosed an advanced inner ear infection and recommended that the parents drive the kid to a larger hospital 55 miles away. The child ended up dying of overwhelming sepsis. Five months later Dr Schug was handcuffed in his ER by detectives and brought to the County jail. He was charged with second degree murder. At trial, the judge listened to the prosecutor’s presentation and threw out the case before Dr. Schug’s attorneys could present any counter-evidence.

The frightening thing is that the decision to make a medical malpractice event a criminal case is entirely up to the discretion of the prosecutor. Vague, non-specific terms like “wanton disregard of patient well-being” and “willful recklessness” are used to guide the decision making process but ultimately it becomes an arbitrary judgment call. We can all imagine scenarios where a doctor could be justifiably criminally prosecuted. The recalcitrant drunk surgeon who skips out of town before formal disciplinary measures can be implemented and finally really hurts someone while impaired at some rural, unsuspecting hospital in another state. The depraved OB/Gyn who repeatedly refuses to follow standard of care guidelines such as fetal monitoring because he “knows what’s best”. The quack who forges a medical degree after losing his license in one state and ends up clear across the country in a doc-in-the-box where he kills someone by writing the wrong prescription. But rarely is the real world so incontrovertible. We will always have bad outcomes secondary to questionable decision making in medicine. We have safeguards in place (hospital QA committees, state licensing boards, national malpractice databases) to help ensure that “bad physicians” are identified and either reformed or removed from practice. But is it enough? Eric Cropp lost his license after a professional inquiry. He hasn’t been able to find work since. He disgraced himself as a pharmacist. But now he will also go through the rest of his life stigmatized as a convicted felon who has done time in the clink. He’s basically ruined. The tragic death of a toddler notwithstanding, I find such a predicament rather harsh.

Something is off in a case like this. Criminal prosecution of doctors will never be common, number one, because who the hell would ever go to medical school if there was a possibility you could not only get sued, but have to go to jail for an unintentional error (and btw defending a criminal lawsuit is NOT covered by malpractice insurance), and number two, the trial lawyers would never allow it (remember, in a criminal suit the State is the plaintiff and the purpose is punishment rather than compensation of the victim/trial lawyer). But a case like this one sets an ominous precedent for future emotionally charged situations where there are bad outcomes (like when a child dies). Can you imagine losing your child because some idiot technician mixed up the wrong medicine and the lazy-ass pharmacist didn’t bother to properly inspect it? You’d want justice right? And exactly how does a $12 million or whatever malpractice judgment in your favor propitiate your rage when you’ve just buried your kid? You’d want those responsible punished somehow, beyond financial decimation, beyond professional disbarment, but truly, irrevocably punished. You’d give all that settlement money just to see them led off to jail in handcuffs. I understand that kind of pain. But let’s make sure the full force of the law is reserved for those rare cases of “wanton negligence” and “willful neglect”….

A guest columnist

about | more

Comments RSS Post a comment

Another Tragedy, Another Criminal…

It’s spurred the Ohio legislature to name a law after her, always a bad sign….

Comment by Simple Justice — June 8, 2009 @ 6:11 am

Criminalizing medical errors…

An Ohio pharmacist has pleaded no contest to charges of involuntary manslaughter after failing to properly supervise a subordinate who wrongly formulated a chemotherapy preparation, resulting in the death of a two-year-old child. [Cleveland Plain Deale…

Comment by PointOfLaw Forum — June 8, 2009 @ 8:28 am

You obviously do not know the facts of this case. The saline, a clear liquid was mixed by Katie Dudash. Despite having access to premixed solution and bags decided to mix it herself because she was “distracted by planning her wedding”. When asked if it was the percentage requested Ms. Dudash said it was. Mr. Cropp took her at her word, he was not required to test the solution. This was the hospital policy. The hospital settled with the family and threw the Pharmacist under the bus.

Mr. Cropp is a caring medical professional and has been for 15+ years. He is human and humans make mistakes. This case is wrong and the punishment does not fit the crime.

Comment by tarheel2000 — June 17, 2009 @ 1:28 pm

The Ohio State Board of
Pharmacy imposed the maximum
fine allowed on a Toledo
pharmacist in a medication
error case involving the death of
a cancer patient. In addition,
Daniel M. Scott, a pharmacist
at Riverside Mercy Home
Pharmacy Services, was charged
by a grand jury with one count
of involuntary manslaughter in
the death of 62-year-old Lyle
Ganske on July 11, 2000.
William T. Winsley, the executive
director of the Ohio Board,
explains, “Scott is used to
dispensing medications involving
no more than a 24-hour
dose. He was not familiar with
dispensing medications that
are to be administered over a
longer period of time. In the
victim’s case, the intravenous
treatment of Adriamycin® and
vincristine was supposed to be
administered on an out-patient
basis over a four-day period.
Instead, Scott dispensed four
times the four-day dosage to
Ganske, a chemotherapy patient.”
Winsley says Scott was given
the doctor’s prescription order,
which clearly stated what
medication was needed and
how much. However, according
to Winsley, Scott failed to look
at the doctor’s order and
instead read the nurse’s
transcription that could have
been interpreted two ways.
The Board Minutes, dated
August 6, 7, and 8, 2001,
further explains that Scott
dispensed the drug without
having the correct directions
for use indicated on the label
affixed to the container and did
not indicate the directions for
use of the medication as was
prescribed by the physician.
The Board also found that
Scott failed to perform prospective
drug utilization review.
Winsley stresses that this is
“not just a medication error
case.” He notes that, “All
pharmacists need to know their
limitations because the general
public holds pharmacists
responsible and accountable
for their actions, including
those seen and proven as
errors. If pharmacists are put
into a position and expected to
perform a specific task, they
must say no if they feel unsure
or unfamiliar with the task.
Pharmacists need to know
what their capabilities are and
how not to act outside them.”
Just prior to this case, the
pharmacy practice act regarding
license restrictions
changed. The Board now has
the authority to restrict
licenses of pharmacists,
including those involved in
error cases instead of suspending
or revoking them.
Based on the findings at the
hearing, the Board concluded
that Scott was “guilty of
unprofessional conduct in the
practice of pharmacy as
provided in Division (A)(2) of
Section 4729.16 of the Ohio
Revised Code.” Scott was fined
$1,500 by the Board. If convicted
by the court, he could
face one to five years in prison

Comment by Jen Marks — June 27, 2009 @ 2:27 pm

[...] was something wrong with the mixture, though he still approved it. Emily died days later. Dadush was granted immunity for testifying against [...]

Comment by Former UH pharmacist likely to serve full sentence after early-release appeal denied : MedCity News — December 29, 2009 @ 10:56 pm

We are all missing the most important issue here. WHY ARE WE ALLOW A TECHNICIAN INSTEAD OF A PHARMACIST TO COMPOUND DRUG??!!!! IT SHOULD BE AGAINST THE LAW FOR ANY NON LICENSED PHARMACIST TO COMPOUND DRUG..ESPECIALLY IV..FOR PATIENTS. I am a 15 years licensed pharmacist working in the hospital. I always felt very angry whenever they rotate me to go work in the IV room instead of outpatient clinic. They hired one pharmacist and 3 technicians and that one pharmacist are responsible in checking the work of the technicians. How am I going to check??? The technicians can put 2 banana juice into the iv bag and I wouldn’t be able to check. I can only check the bag visually and rely on the technician being competent enough to inject the right thing and right amount…which he claimed…into the bag. IT IS SO SCARY!!!!! The technician is not responsible..only I am responsible because I supposed to be CHECKING..a licensed pharmacist. And I am as a pharmacist are not suppose to compound any drug because THERE IS NO TIME!!! IT IS SO BUSY IN THE PHARMACY…SIX HUNDRED ORDERS..AND NON STOP PHONE CALLS FROM THREE PHONES INQUIRING PHARMACIST FOR DRUG INFORMATIONS…THAT IS WHY THE HOSPITAL HIRED 3 TECHS TO HELP ME. I AM SUPPOSE TO CHECK THEIR WORK.

I think the US government and management of the health care should be sued for running our healtcare system like this. They want to spend less money cutting cost on hiring staff. Replacing pharmacist with non licensed people called technicians. A licensed technician is not equal to a licensed pharmacist.
This is what our government is doing.

Comment by mina — July 20, 2010 @ 8:37 pm

Dr. Jeffery Parks apparently has no clue what happened to the case. He should not be making any comment about the pharmacist eric cropp…that “He was inattentive and lazy and careless, and now he faces the real possibility of serving jailtime as a consequence.”

Please mr.jeffery parks..next time study the case and understand the pharmacy profession and environment before making any unprofessional comments.

Comment by mina — July 20, 2010 @ 8:41 pm

Post a Comment

Submit Comment

Be a Thought Leader: Join MedCitizens

Anyone can blog on MedCity News when they become a "MedCitizen." MedCitizens publish their own thoughts about current medical news and the latest issues in healthcare to the entire MedCity News audience.

Click to login or learn more

MedCity Jobs Board


MedCity Whitepapers

Real Time Web Analytics