Making Medical Malpractice Legal

Medical malpractice is a complicated legal field. Physicians must take steps to protect themselves from legal liability by obtaining sufficient medical malpractice insurance coverage.

Patients must prove that a physician's breach of duty led to injury. Damages are contingent on economic losses like lost income, future medical costs as well as non-economic losses, like discomfort and pain.

Duty of care

The duty of care is the first element a medical malpractice lawyer must establish in a case. All healthcare professionals are accountable towards their patients to act in accordance with the standard of care that is applicable to their area of expertise. This includes doctors and nurses as in addition to other medical professionals. It also includes assistants, interns, and medical students working under the supervision of an attending physician or doctor.

The standard of care is determined by an expert witness from medical in the court. They scrutinize the medical records and compare them to the standards of care a competent doctor in the same field would do in similar circumstances.

If the healthcare professional's or their actions were below this standard, they have breached their duty of medical care and caused injury. The patient who was injured must demonstrate that the breach of care by the healthcare professional directly impacted their losses. This can include scarring, pain, and other injuries. They may also include financial losses such as medical expenses and lost wages.

For instance when a surgeon has left a surgical instrument inside the patient after surgery, it could trigger discomfort and other issues that could cause damage. Medical malpractice lawyers can establish through the testimony of an expert medical doctor that the surgical team's negligence caused the damages. This is known as direct causation. The patient must also show proof of their injuries.

Breach of duty

A malpractice claim may be filed if a medical professional violates the accepted standards of practice and results in injury to patients. The injured party must prove that the physician breached their duty to care by providing substandard treatment. In other words, the doctor was negligent and this action caused the patient to suffer damages.

To establish that a doctor breached his duty of care, a knowledgeable attorney has to present an expert witness testimony to prove that the defendant was unable to have the level of knowledge and skill that doctors of their specialization have. Furthermore, the plaintiff must establish a direct causal connection between the negligence alleged and the injuries sustained that resulted from it. This is known as causation.

A plaintiff who has been injured must prove that he or she would not have chosen one particular treatment had they been properly informed. This is also referred to as the principle of informed consent. Physicians must inform patients of potential risks or complications that could arise from a procedure before they perform surgery or place the patient under anesthesia.

In order to file a medical negligence case, the injured patient must make a claim within a specific time period that is known as the statute of limitations. A court will typically dismiss a lawsuit filed after the statute of limitations has expired regardless of how grave the error of the health professional or how harmful to the patient was. Some states have laws that require plaintiffs in a medical malpractice lawsuit to engage in voluntary binding arbitration or submit their claims to a screening panel prior medical malpractice to going to trial.

Causation

Both the lawyers and physicians who are involved in the litigation need to put in a lot of time and resources in order to prove medical malpractice. The process of proving the doctor's treatment was different from the accepted standard calls for a thorough analysis of medical records, interview with witnesses, and a thorough analysis of medical literature. Furthermore, lawsuits must be filed within a period of time set by law. Generally, this deadline--called the statute of limitations -- begins to expire when the health care treatment error occurred or when the patient realized (or should have known according to the law) that they had been harmed by a mistake made by a doctor.

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

If a lawyer can prove these three key elements, then the victim of malpractice could be able to receive an amount of money from the defendant. The purpose of these monetary damages is to compensate the victim's injury and loss of quality of life and other losses.

Damages

Medical malpractice cases can be complex and require expert testimony. The plaintiff's lawyer must show that a doctor failed to follow the standards of medical treatment, that this failure caused injury, and that this injury was caused by damages. The plaintiff must also demonstrate that the injury can be quantified in terms of dollars.

Medical negligence claims can be one of the most complicated and expensive legal cases. To lower the expense of lawsuits, states have enacted tort reform measures aimed at improving efficiency, limiting frivolous claims and compensating injured parties fairly. These measures include reducing what plaintiffs can receive for pain and suffering, and limiting the number defendants who are responsible for paying an award and requiring mediation or arbitration.

Additionally, many malpractice cases are based on highly technical issues that are difficult for juries and judges to grasp. Experts are essential in these cases. For example the case where a surgeon has made an error during a procedure the patient's lawyer needs to engage an orthopedic expert to explain why the specific error would not have occurred had the surgeon acted according to the relevant medical standards of care.