Not a lawyer so this is only anecdotal but It is actually very hard to sue a doctor unless its egregious to my understanding and your rewards are limited to the point where most lawyers are hesitant to take the case due to that. Have a family member that got a colonoscopy and the doctor commented after that there was a bit of a tough time getting it in but he just pushed a little harder and all was fine. That push actually perforated the bowel and he got sepsis and spent 3 weeks in the hospital and many months with a coloscopy bag. No lawyer would take the case.

I do wonder how it must feel to be a doctor who is one bad call away from being sued or revoked.

what's the alternative in practice; having no recourse if a negligent doctor maims or kills you?

There's a big difference between negligence and making a good-faith decision based on training and experience that later turns out to be wrong.

Actual negligence should, of course, absolutely be punished.

Well said.

Maybe in the US, probably not anywhere else. You'd have to prove actual negligence, and in this case, it's quite possible the doctor's decision was reasonable. Benign abnormal heart behavior is pretty common.

Is it just me or is this such a stereotypical American comment?

I’m not american and thought this would be a good generic word to convey “getting some answers/justice”.

I’ve had so many infuriating encounters with dismissive doctors, that I fear I’ll get into a similar situation.

The healthcare system is really strained, but does it have to give them the right to not take your “only annoying, not life threatening” level of simptoms seriously?

I do not have the resources to go for three different doctors to really make sure they are right about telling me “just don’t worry about it..”