Dr. Death – “Three Days in Dallas”

            Our healthcare consists of the individuals we place our utmost faith in – we trust the doctors performing our surgeries, we trust the hospitals protecting us, most importantly, we trust our system of healthcare. As a patient, you’re taught to trust your surgeons, and believe that the simplest of operations will proceed with little error. What are you to consider when you wake up and your body is maimed, and the loss of the ability to walk marks you as “one of the lucky ones”. The system we endow for healing, what do we make of our healthcare when it fails to protect, but rather place individuals in death’s grasp? Dr. Death tells the story of Dr. Christopher Duntsch, a one well-respected neurosurgeon – who took advantage of our system’s protections to grossly injure and wound the patients that placed their lives into his hands.

            Dr. Death sets the tone in a positive light – warm music, advertisements, Dr. Christopher is depicted as one of kindest and most caring individuals to have ever graced the operating room. A well-known neurosurgeon, he was once thought of as the best of the best, in terms of spinal surgeries. However, this brief introduction is quickly interjected by the pain and anguish of a series of patients; all of which suffered beneath the scalpel of Dr. Duntsch. The first episode follows a series of shocking events following the surgeries performed by Duntsch; acts that are of greatest concern to those who are remotely familiar with the United States healthcare system. The cases in particular were similar to a degree: a patient would have slight back pain, only to be operated by Duntsch. Initially feeling fine, these patients were to later feel an immense pain, greater than what they had brought into the operating room.

            Medical journalist Laura Beil narrates this podcast, walking listeners through one of Duntsch’s deadliest surgeries. In conjunction to Beil’s dialogue, we are provided excerpts from interviews with the medical staff whom interacted with Duntsch. Dr. Robert Henderson, another well-respected surgeon allows readers to explore various perspectives from other professionals, and Kyle Kissenger, an OR nurse provides a first-hand depiction as to what had truly occurred during the surgery. All such narrators speak with great imagery, providing gory details that allow listeners to truly visualize what is occurring. Duntsch entering the OR, it was already quite clear that there was something wrong with him – he was forty minutes late to a surgery, wearing what appeared to be the same dirty scrubs that he had worn for the past three days. Kissenger further discusses the details of this surgery, how Duntsch had continued to insert and remove screws into various parts of the spine, and refused to listen to any advice provided by those assisting the surgery. Henderson, on the other hand, guides listeners through a post-operation patient that Duntsch had operated on, a woman who was in immense pain. Henderson points out screws sticking out of the spine, loose rods attached to the spinal canal, bone fragments laying about, and most importantly – amputated nerve roots that result in the loss of the ability to walk.

            These interviews and narrative dialogues add a sense of credibility, and characterization to the once well-respected Dr. Duntsch. They’re primary sources, and professionals to some extent, who all have opinions on the ways in which both Duntsch and the system of healthcare had failed to protect their own patients. Beyond these medical professionals, Dr. Death includes dialogue and interviews from previous patients of Duntsch who had survived his operations. One patient in particular – Shirley Mock, had returned to Duntsch for what was assumed to be a check up surgery, only to return with even greater pain than before. Listening to people such as Mock, these victims bring forth great emotion to the listeners, as you truly felt bad for a poor old woman who happened to be a victim of fraud. Music and sound effects continue to be highly prevalent throughout the editing of Dr. Death. Noises from operating rooms place listeners in the perspective of those attending the OR, and situations can quickly turn for the worst just by a slight change in sound. These decisions based on background music placed greater emphasis on the wrongdoings of Duntsch – indicating the moments in which he not only forced a woman to lose her ability to walk, but another losing her own life. These few cases, however, are just the beginning of this twisted tale, as Duntsch’s actions as a surgeon are just a mere introduction to the flaws in our own healthcare system.

Word Count: 764

2 Comments

  1. Hi Jjay,
    I really enjoyed reading your first blog post about your podcast, Dr. Death. It was very enticing to me from the start since it had to do with medicine and healthcare. Your podcast seemed to be very similar to mine, taking a deeper look into a controversy in the healthcare industry. My podcast, The Dropout, is about Stanford dropout, Elizabeth Holmes who became the youngest, self made, female billionaire, all on the lies of her fraudulent company, Theranos, which specialized in providing portable and affordable treatments and diagnosis using just a drop of blood. I know, it sounds too good to be true because at the current state of healthcare we are now, it is too good to be true. She is now taken to federal court for her crimes and wrongdoings. However, your podcast’s narrative seems to be even more extreme since it has to do with real life patients who are suffering. Holmes’s company and device was under scrutiny for misdiagnosing patients’ blood she received which is not good but it seems like Dr. Death’s wrongdoings is even worse because it actually causes physical pain on people who are already in pain and looking for help. Who in the medical field could ever do such a thing? People come to him seeking help but he purposefully causes more pain? That is disgraceful and disgusting. My narrator also included many interviews that gave exclusive insight to the person of conflict. I also thought they were a good way to introduce the person and provide background information since they have first hand experience with them. I think they are also interesting to the listener since it brings in a different voice and perspective into the podcast. However, I believe they might present a small bias since those people probably agreed to be interviewed to be able to inform the public about that person.

Leave a Comment