I would say-a reasonable (not outstanding) physician would have A. put a close eye on a patient who keeps on saying that she is doing worse (instead of better) with treatment. B. trust what she says unless they have very good and proven reasons not to. C. make sure that even if they are not able to be physically present they receive accurate data (without interpretations) from the most competent and experienced residents and nurses. D. definitely come in when they are called and not trust a resident who tells them that there is nothing seriously wrong when they receive very different information from a close and reliable relative. E. Not discharged a patient who has episodes of un-measurable vital capacity and requires frequent respiratory support without a review of her condition with a respiratory physician. F. Definitely not write a letter to her GP saying that she is in remission and does not require any medical assistance or intervention when discharging her in such a condition. G. Definitely not put a big "?!" on results of supposedly accurate tests that show that he is seriously wrong in his clinical assessment.

I think (and also told him) that what he and his team did was on the verge of malpractice. I don't think the limitations of neurology justify this. In fact I think that such an inaccurate field requires that you be much more cautious and humble in front of your patients. If you have no clue of how to assess respiratory insufficiency and have no understanding of the proper interpretation of respiratory tests, how can you take upon yourself to decide that there is nothing physically wrong with your patient?