Man Suing Kaiser For Failing To Inform Him He May Have Colon Cancer For Two Years

| by Will Hagle

A man is suing health care company Kaiser for waiting more than two years to inform him that his test results indicated he may have cancer. 

According to Courthouse News, the man, Gregory Magnussen, is suing Dr. Samuel W. Moss, the Southeast Permanente Medical Group, Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of Georgia and an affailiate, and Kasier Permanente Insurance, in Fulton County (GA) State Court. 

The complaint states that Magnussen was tested by Dr. Moss in April 2010 but never received a response as to the nature of the test results. The Magnussens assumed that the lack of response indicated that nothing was wrong. After visiting another doctor, Gary Orris, in October 2011, a large mass was found in Magnussen’s colon. 

Another doctor, Dr. J. Clay Copher, became involved with Magnussen, telling him that he “had a large cancerous growth that would need to be removed immediately.” 

The complaint continues to state the following: “Due to the size of the growth, Dr. Copher indicated to G. Magnussen that a large amount of his colon would have to be removed and a colostomy would be required.”

After Magnussen underwent surgery to remove the mass, including follow-up chemotherapy and radiation, he finally received a letter from Kaiser indicating that they had evidence of the cancer two years prior to Magnussen’s interactions with Dr. Orris or Dr. Copher. 

The letter from Kaiser is somewhat startling, considering the circumstances. It states the following: “Our records indicate that you are no longer enrolled with Kaiser Permanente. We want to inform you that you had an abnormal laboratory test prior to leaving our care that you should discuss with your new doctor or health care provider. You received a positive fecal occult blood test (FOBT) on 4/12/10 which is a test used as a screening for colon cancer. Your test indicates that further evaluation is required. Please contact your current physician for further guidance” 

According to RINF, the Magnussens are basing their complaint on the fact that “over the course of a number of years, the Magnussens had grown accustomed to hearing from defendants if any of their test results indicated that further attention might be necessary.”