During my eye exam, it was odd to have to hear Melinda Surdacki OD repeatedly say 'that's normal'/'this is normal', related to marked difficulty I have in vision and seeing, post concussive symptoms that arose this July.
It's not normal that I can only see 20% out of 1 eye right now, due to extreme blurriness (my eye now does this with variability, upon triggers, after the concussive symptoms began...I've been at 20% the past 15 hours, worsening starting 12 hours before that). It stinks having this burden, but doubly so when an eye doctor normalizes major, functional limitations, ignoring needs.
Had I such triggers just before my eye exam visit, I am sure I'd have been given a more severe correction/prescription. But just prior, I'd had nearly no exposure, making the Dr's Rx useless; it ignores my variable vision function.
[Surdacki seemed resistant to HEARING after learning my concussive symptoms came by a medical doctor (found to have been multi-tasking while doing a skull treatment on me, wrongly manipulating the skull and eye and creating these symptoms, as verified by that clinic's later examination).
Once Dr. Surdacki heard this, her tone and demeanor went to the 'odd' mode I mentioned, hyper-normalizing, as if all doctors are in a loyalty club and patient care is secondary. Insodoing, Surdacki's professionalism tanked. Her priority ought to have been on maximally improving patient functioning.]
Surdacki volunteered zero info on supplements, exercises, etc. Notably, weeks before the exam, her (Clarkson Eyecare) office lead explicitly expressed Dr. Surdacki would gladly give eye exercises inside this exam, to help where able...Dr. Surdacki denied this once in the visit (as if the office says whatever it can to get patients in), stating she had 'no idea what exercises to give' without glasses, though she also said she 'works in vision therapy all the time'...odd.
In this way, Surdacki came off as 'running' from helping. I next reminded the Dr., saying, 'um, since it hurts my eyes to move this way or that, maybe exercises/stretches in those areas, so movement doesn't hurt so much?'.
Surdacki seemed highly-attached to 'let's get you in glasses' and 'no way to give you exercises without glasses' and 'everything's normal', yet, when it came time to diagnose the health of the eye, she said there were essential things she needed to see due to the concussive symptoms I described, since I've not yet had an MRI, and she *needed* me to have a surcharged service done (via a specialized photography machine) if I don't want dilation.
No.
I did not sign-up for a for-charge exam. I'd also disclosed to staff before I set foot in the office that I have a condition sensitizing me to chemicals including perfumes and colognes in my midst. The staff should have disclosed at that time that they require chemicals via dilation to do the agreed-to, free exam, in full -- a fullness specified by their own doctor. Staff did not disclose, and they tried to get me pay to meet the doctor's need, within foregoing dilation.
This is a kind of fraud, which repeated itself as I overheard patient after patient outside my exam room (where I sat ~20 minutes, hamstrung due to the office stopping my visit mid-way while they tried to impose the fee they did not disclose at time of scheduling) -- each patient noticeably expressed similar reactions of 'wait, what?', as staff chirped, 'There is a $39 fee (for your 'free' exam) if you don't want dilation'. All of those patients acquiesced, perhaps feeling no choice, caving into pressure. But there is always choice.
The Dr.'s office further behaved oddly when I asked for proof of my visit -- paperwork, notes, etc., and they gave nothing, only a prescription (which lacks credibility due to the doctor's bias towards 'this is normal', whilst my vision is varying widely amidst concussive symptom complications). While the doctor said she'd later send/provide notes, she stated she needed more time to write them...it's again odd, and grossly inconsistent, for a doctor to be less-than regarding in person, to gloss-over/skip-over health matters in front of her, to pressure a patient to have a scan that is not agreed-to, to skip that scan because of the office's bungling, and then present as if she is thorough, only in the absence of the patient (via notes later). It's poor form.
Even after I nudged Surdacki towards exercises, per above, she rushed -- no instructions, no illustration, so I had to nudge her later, further, at which point she finally revealed *how* to actually stretch (hold eyes awhile where strained vs just moving around/across). I'd have missed that key point had I not persisted, and I don't think a good doctor should have to be handheld.
Had this doctor given required regard, skills, attentive hearing -- putting aside bias/blocks -- for proper thoroughness, accuracy and care -- this would not be a 1-star situation, atop her (new) office's lack of ethics. read more
