It occurs when a doctor or other health care provider fails to meet the standard of care expected in their profession, causing harm or injury to the patient. Medical malpractice cases are fairly common and often involve extensive discovery and negotiations in an adversarial format.
In order to prove medical malpractice, the plaintiff (the patient or their representative) must establish four elements:
A professional duty owed to the patient. This means that the doctor or health care provider had a legal obligation to provide care to the patient in accordance with the accepted norms and practices of their field. For example, a radiologist has a duty to interpret and report the results of an imaging test accurately and timely.
Breach of such duty. This means that the doctor or health care provider deviated from the standard of care in some way, either by doing something wrong or failing to do something right. For example, a radiologist may breach their duty by misreading an X-ray or failing to communicate a critical finding to the referring physician.
Injury caused by the breach. This means that the patient suffered some harm or damage as a direct result of the doctor’s or health care provider’s negligence. For example, a patient may suffer from delayed diagnosis, incorrect treatment, or worsened condition due to the radiologist’s error.
Resulting damages. This means that the patient incurred some losses or expenses due to the injury caused by the breach. These may include medical bills, lost wages, pain and suffering, emotional distress, or reduced quality of life.
If the plaintiff can prove these four elements, they may be entitled to receive compensation from the defendant (the doctor or health care provider) or their insurance company. The amount of compensation, if awarded, typically takes into account both actual economic loss and noneconomic loss, such as pain and suffering.
However, proving medical malpractice is not easy and often requires expert testimony, medical records, and other evidence. The defendant may also have various defenses, such as contributory negligence, statute of limitations, or good faith immunity. Moreover, medical malpractice cases are usually decided by a jury of “peers”, who may not have sufficient knowledge or understanding of the medical issues involved.
Therefore, before engaging in the legal system to settle medical malpractice cases, it is important to consider whether it is worth it and what are the risks and benefits involved. It may be better to seek alternative dispute resolution methods, such as mediation or arbitration, which may be faster, cheaper, and less stressful than litigation.
For more information on medical malpractice cases, you can read this paper, which provides a comprehensive overview of the topic from a legal perspective.
Comments