Question:
I have badly tetracycline stained teeth.
I have tried in house bleaching and it has not improved my teeth. My
teeth otherwise are strong, straight and would be "Hollywood smiles"
without the discolouring.
Attention lawyers.
Can I sue the NHS (in the UK) for prescribing me a drug as an infant
that has had a physical and psychological effect on myself that I had no
control over whatsoever.
I read with interest of how people in America sue under medical
conditions that they have had some influence over (e.g. tobacco smoking)
so I see no reason why I cannot seek damages for side effects caused by
drugs that may have been improperly or properly administered at youth.
Answer:
What type of bleaching have you tried?
In office bleaching done by your dentist with rubberdam, concentrated
peroxide and heat?
In office bleaching done by your dentist with rubberdam, concentrated
peroxide and laser?
Take home bleaching kit provided by your dentist?
Bought off the shelf and done at home bleaching?
I am neither a dentist or a lawyer. From what little I know about the
law, such a suit would not get far in the US. Most drugs have some known
side effects. If we removed all drugs with side effects from the market,
there would be none left. Therefore; the use of any drug is a medical
decision based on a weighing of the risks and benefits.
Typically, you would have to show that the drug manufacturer did not do
due diligence in testing the product, or actually concealed the product's
flaws. Alternatively, you would have to show, decades after the fact, that
the practitioner made an improper treatment decision. Not likely.
Depending on your financial situation, there are some options for treatment
of severe tetracycline staining.
1) Bleaching. Sorry, but this is not likely to improve the discoloration.
It will *affect* the color, but it will not make them much lighter, if at
all. For severe tetracycline staining, I consider this a waste of time,
money, and hope.
2) Composite veneers. Commonly referred to as "bonding" here in the US,
this method is very technique sensitive with respect to final esthetic
result. In the right hands, this can yield quite good results, but it is
almost as expensive as the next option, which I believe to be superior.
3) Porcelain veneers. Conservative, predictable results, and, when
accomplished with high skill, should be colorfast and long-lasting.
Beautiful.
4) Porcelain or porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns. In my opinion, any dentist
who would place crowns on teeth which, aside from teracycline staining, are
strong and healthy, should be taken to town square and summarily executed
before a crowd of no less than 1000. Crowning them would be like dropping a
hydrogen bomb on a house with ants in the kitchen.
This is where my hopes lie, because I understand that it is not possible to
administer tetracycline to an infant in the UK now due to the known side effects
such as the one I have unfortunately have to live with. My aim is not to sue
for ridiculous money, but enough to cover the treatment costs at an experienced
US dentist.
It's curious that no one has mentioned that stained teeth have been a
known side effect of tetracycline at least since the early 1960's
when I was in dental hygiene school. Of course the available choices of
antibiotics may have been more limited.
Re #4 (crowns) I have a friend who was in a car accident that cost her
several teeth, which had to be rootcanaled and crowned. Recently, her
dentist wanted to crown the other front teeth (which were healthy) to
match, and I suggested she say no since those teeth were completely
healthy.
