Quantcast

Doctor sued over anti-seizure medication

MADISON - ST. CLAIR RECORD

Monday, November 25, 2024

Doctor sued over anti-seizure medication

The guardians of a man who suffers from seizures have filed suit against the doctor who they say failed to adequately listen and respond to their complaints.

Sherry R. Scott and James E. Scott, guardians of the estate of Bryan E. Scott, claim Bryan Scott started going to defendant Dr. Daniel T. Mattson at defendant St. Louis Neurological Institute in May 2008 for help treating his recurring seizures.

According to the complaint filed May 4 in Madison County Circuit Court, Mattson changed the medications Bryan Scott was taking to treat the seizures.

However, after switching medications, Mattson failed to listen and respond to Bryan E. Scott's and his parents' complaints concerning the fact that the medicine was not working and that Bryan E. Scott was actually suffering from an increase in seizures, the suit states.

In addition, Mattson allegedly negligently failed to examine Bryan E. Scott and to take his appropriate history when his parents complained of an increase in his seizures, failed to recognize that the medications should not have been changed and failed to conduct appropriate testing and follow-up on Bryan E. Scott to ensure his increase of seizures did not continue, the complaint says.

As a result, Bryan E. Scott suffered from such severe and frequent seizure activity in February 2009 that he had to be emergently transported to Alton Memorial Hospital and from there, transported to St. Louis University Hospital, where he was treated for status-epilepticus, the plaintiffs claim.

His condition has caused Bryan E. Scott to experience pain, suffering, permanent disability and loss of a normal life and to incur medical costs, according to the complaint.

In their complaint, the Scotts are seeking a judgment of more than $50,000, plus costs.

Thomas O. Falb of Williamson, Webster, Falb and Glisson in Alton will be representing them.

Madison County Circuit Court case number: 10-L-482.

More News