Making Medical Malpractice Legal

Medical malpractice is a complex legal issue. Physicians must take steps to protect themselves against risk by purchasing adequate medical malpractice insurance.

Patients must show that the physician's failure to fulfill duty caused injury to them. Damages are determined by the actual economic loss such as lost income and costs of future medical procedures, as well as noneconomic loss such as suffering and pain.

Duty of care

The first element that medical malpractice lawyers need to establish in the case is the duty of care. All healthcare professionals are required towards their patients to act in accordance with the standard of care that is appropriate to their particular field. This includes doctors, nurses and other medical malpractice attorney professionals. This includes medical students, interns and assistants who work under the supervision of a physician or doctor.

The quality of care is set by an expert witness in the court. They examine the medical records and then compare them to the standards of care a competent doctor in the same field would have done under similar circumstances.

If the healthcare professional's actions, or lack of care fell below this standard, they breached their duty of care and caused injury. The injured patient needs to demonstrate that the healthcare professional's breach directly led to their losses. This could include scarring, pain and medical malpractice lawsuit other injuries. They can also include financial loss such as medical expenses and lost wages.

If a surgeon has left an instrument for surgery in a patient after surgery, this could cause pain or other problems, that could cause damage. Medical malpractice lawyers can establish through the testimony of an expert medical professional that the surgical team's negligence resulted in these damages. This is known as direct causation. The patient must also provide evidence of their damages.

Breach of duty

A malpractice claim can be filed when medical malpractice lawsuit professionals violate the accepted standards of practice and results in injury to patients. The victim must prove that the doctor breached their duty of care by offering substandard treatment. In other words the doctor acted negligently and this caused the patient to suffer damage.

To prove that a physician did not meet his duty of care, a skilled attorney must present an expert witness testimony to establish that the defendant was unable to possess or exercise the same level of expertise and knowledge physicians in their specialty hold. The plaintiff must also demonstrate that there is a direct correlation between the alleged negligence, and the injuries sustained. This is called causation.

A person who is injured must prove that he or she would not have chosen one particular treatment had they been properly informed. This is also known as the principle of informed consent. Physicians are required to inform their patients about the risks and complications associated with a particular procedure prior to undergoing surgery or placing the patient under anesthesia.

To make a medical malpractice claim, the victim must file a lawsuit within a timeframe known as the statute of limitations. Whatever the severity of the mistake made by the healthcare provider or the extent to which the patient has been injured the court will almost always reject any claim made after the statutes of limitations have passed. Certain states require that parties to a medical malpractice lawsuit submit their claims to an independent screening panel or to voluntary binding arbitration as an alternative to a trial.

Causation

Both the lawyers and the physicians involved in the litigation have to spend a considerable amount of time and resources in order to demonstrate medical malpractice. The process of proving the doctor's treatment was different from the accepted norm requires a thorough examination of medical records, interviews with witnesses, as well as an analysis of medical literature. Furthermore lawsuits must be filed within a period of time set by law. This deadline, also known as the statute of limitations starts to run when a mishap in health care was made or when a patient discovers (or should have discovered according to the law) they were injured by an error made by a doctor.

Proving causation is among the four fundamental elements of medical malpractice claims and probably the most difficult one to prove. Lawyers must prove that a doctor's failure to fulfill the duty to care caused injury to a patient, and that the injury would not have occurred but due to the negligence of a doctor. This is referred to as proximate or actual cause. The legal standard for proving this element differs from the one used in criminal cases, where proof must be beyond reasonable doubt.

If a lawyer can prove these three elements that the victim of malpractice could be entitled to monetary compensation. The purpose of these damages is to compensate the victim for their injuries, loss of quality of life and other losses.

Damages

Medical malpractice cases are often complicated and require a large amount of expert testimony. The attorney for the plaintiff must show that the doctor failed to meet a minimum standard of care, and that the negligence caused injury, and that such injury caused damages. The plaintiff must also show that the injury was measurable in terms of dollars.

Medical negligence claims are among the most complex and expensive legal cases. To combat the high cost of litigation, states have implemented tort reform measures that aim to improve efficiency by limiting frivolous claims as well as making sure injured parties are compensated fairly. These measures include limiting the amount plaintiffs can be compensated for suffering and pain, limiting the number defendants who are responsible for paying the award and requiring arbitration or mediation.

Many malpractice claims also have technical aspects that are difficult to understand by juries and judges. This is why experts are so important in these cases. For example in the event that a surgeon makes an error during a procedure the patient's lawyer has to engage an orthopedic expert to explain how the error could not have happened had the surgeon acted in accordance with the relevant medical guidelines of care.