GENERAL:\r
\r
Seems very competent in our simpler case (tests were normal) but made me wonder if he would have discovered any evidence to the contrary in the first place. He read the file during the appointment (typical), asked many questions but interrupted after the first few words (never get to tell him the full story), and asked more questions later that would have been answered already if he didn’t interrupt so much. His exam was thorough, but he didn’t seem to register the history I was trying hard to provide. This wasn’t a tome, just a regular history for a generally healthy child. \r
\r
BAD MOVE:\r
\r
Only watched 5 seconds of a 60-sec video of my child’s movement disorder. Child wasn’t having them that day, so it was important! Especially since witnessing it first-hand is what prompted our pediatrician to order consultation, MRI and EEG in the first place (tests Dr. D deemed unnecessary after the fact... hmmm). He also spoke so fast that had I not already read up extensively on what he was saying, I could not have kept up. I also might not have trusted his conclusions without my own research in mind, since he reached them with 30% of the data I had to offer. No clue how differently he approaches more complex cases. Slower, I hope.\r
\r
BOTTOM LINE:\r
\r
He’s a bit rude and dismissive, but then again, that doesn’t mean he’s not right. Maybe extensive experience allows him to jump quickly to a correct diagnosis, but I think he should still be more thorough in gathering history in this particularly nebulous field. If we need further consultation, I’ll go elsewhere for diligence and confirmation. After that, we’ll see.\r
more