I just don’t understand it here in UK, why is it so bad? I’m from Australia living in London and when i first registered for a doctor i was told i would have to wait 2 – 3 weeks. So you have to know in advance if you’re going to be sick? I had been terribly i’ll for 3 days , fever, vomiting, diarrhea etc, so i decided to go to a walk in clinic instead where after waiting 5 hours i was told that i didn’t really need to see a doctor and i would only be seeing a nurse. Upon explaining my symptoms the nurse she asked me if i had eaten out in the last 3 days, after i replied that i hadn’t eaten out at all, she just out of no where looked me straight in the face and said exactly this “Why are you trying to deny it could be something you have eaten?”. I was literally just speechless. Anyway a long story short, she prescribed me water. I then went across the road to the chemist and asked if they had anything to settle my stomach and diarrhea and she just looked at me and said you need to see a doctor, i literally just laughed.
Back surgery remains a highly controversial area of surgical medicine and the ambiguity of the outcomes supports why some surgeons are extremely conservative in identifying good surgical candidates. The first surgeon did not find you to be a good surgical candidate, the second one did. "proving" that surgeon #1 lied to you may assuage your outrage, but does nothing to further your case or your health and it's likely to fail in court. So my opinion, move on. Best of luck.
Unfortunately, just because one of these things occurs does not mean you have a claim. Medicine is not an exact science, and the law does not obligate doctors to be error-free 100 percent of the time. If doctor error occurs but there is no breach of a standard of care, you may not have a strong claim. If however, doctor error occurs and there is a breach of a standard of care, then malpractice may have occurred.
When you go to a hospital, you expect that the medical care you receive will make you better. But with multiple health care professionals in hospitals involved in your treatment, the risk of medical error increases. Sometimes, inadequate patient safety procedures cause hospitals to commit serious medical errors and patients are seriously or fatally injured. Our hospital malpractice attorneys are here for you.
Battery occurs when a person intentionally touches or has other unwelcome physical contact with another person in a harmful or offensive manner. Battery may apply when patients are sexually or physically abused by their doctors. This can also occur when a doctor performs an incorrect surgery or medical treatment on the patient. Likewise, this can occur when a doctor does something to the patient without consent.
The stakes grew higher as damage awards grew exponentially and kept in pace with inflation. Birth injury malpractice cases between widespread as the link between blatant physician error and cerebral palsy became clear. Five of the ten highest paid claims of all time were cerebral palsy suits, for which the plaintiffs won multimillion dollar awards. Plaintiffs became entitled to both economic and noneconomic losses. Economic losses are the quantifiable monetary losses associated with the injury incurred by the defendant's negligence. Noneconomic damages are the unquantifiable emotional losses for pain, suffering and loss of enjoyment of life among other emotional hardships. As juries began to award substantial damages to injured plaintiffs, liability insurance for physicians increased. Physicians and other medical professionals passed these costs along to patients, resulting in higher costs for healthcare. Accessibility to health care was then directly affected by medical malpractice litigation. Throughout the latter half of the 20th century, many states introduced medical malpractice reform acts. Battling the question of whether to favor plaintiff or defendant, states began to impose what is known “damage caps,” which very widely between each state. Damage caps limit the amount of money a plaintiff can collect should they win their malpractice case. Some states impose no limit at all because such limitations are constitutionally prohibited. Other states have taken a long, hard look at the question of damage caps, assessing what numerical figure does not deprive the plaintiff of rightful compensation and is not unjustly punitive to the defendant. The lowest caps sit in the neighborhood $250,000, while the highest caps are in the neighborhood of $2.5 million. A handful of states adopted the use of a medical malpractice fund, to which all physicians in that state must contribute. The fund will pay damages in medical malpractice claims after the physician's insurance covers the first $1 million. This way, physicians need only insurance that covers up to $1 million dollars and no more. This is meant to bring down insurance premiums for medical professionals. To a minor extent, damage caps influence the state a medical professional will choose to practice in, although it is not a huge bearing in their decision. Some states allow for punitive damages, which must be paid by the defendant as punishment but which are not awarded to the plaintiff.
Ex.: Texas has a two-year statute of limitations for medical malpractice cases, and has adopted the continuous treatment rule. If a doctor in Texas causes an injury during surgery, and continues to treat the patient for that injury for 4 more years, then the statute of limitations does not begin to run until the doctor has completed treatment. So, the patient in this example has a total of 6 years to file a lawsuit after the injury was inflicted.
During the formative centuries of English common law after the critical Battle of Hastings in 1066, medical malpractice legislation began taking shape. The Court of Common Law shows several medical malpractice decisions on record. An 1164 case, Everad v. Hopkins saw a servant and his master collect damages against a physician for practicing "unwholesome medicine." The 1374 case Stratton v Swanlond is frequently cited as the "fourteenth-century ancestor" of medical malpractice law. Chief Justice John Cavendish presided over the case, in which one Agnes of Stratton and her husband sued surgeon John Swanlond for breach of contract after he failed to treat and cure her severely mangled hand. Stratton saw her case ultimately dismissed due to an error in the Writ of Complaint, however, the case served as a crucial cornerstone in setting certain standards of medical care.
A medical malpractice action must be commenced within one year after the cause of action accrues. Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 2305.113. A cause of action for medical malpractice accrues when the claimant discovers or, in the exercise of reasonable care and diligence, should have discovered the resulting injury, or when the physician-patient relationship for that condition terminates, whichever occurs later. Frysinger v. Leech, 32 Ohio St. 3d 38, 512 N.E.2d 337 (1987). If a malpractice claimant gives written notice to the prospective defendant within the one-year limitation period, the claimant may bring an action at any time within 180 days of that notice. Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 2305.113).
Most medical procedures or treatments involve some risk. It is the doctor's responsibility to give the patient information about a particular treatment or procedure so the patient can decide whether to undergo the treatment, procedure, or test. This process of providing essential information to the patient and getting the patient's agreement to a certain medical procedure or treatment is called informed consent.
The terms negligence and malpractice are often used interchangeably. Strictly speaking, negligence is a failure to “exercise the care that a reasonably prudent person would exercise” in similar circumstances. Medical malpractice, according to Andre Calitz, the chief operating officer for personal injury law practice Joseph’s Incorporated in Johannesburg, is an evaluation of conduct measured against a standard of medical care established by the medical fraternity.
I see why malpractice insurance is high. I think in many cases it's the attitude that goes along with the malpractice that leads to legal action being taken. I understand that that's not always the case, and sometimes it is simply an accident. However, I know in my family's situation had there been even a tiny morsel of remorse by the physician who treated my grandfather he wouldn't have had to travel to the state capitol. Misreading the fuzzy xray may have been an accident, but sending my grandfather home unable to walk or care for himself, in terrible pain with no pain medication for his broken hip was not an accident. We didn't profit from it, but the physician did have to get an attorney/attorneys when he faced the medical board - so you can blame people like him for the increase in your rates. Had he said he was sorry and not been such an a-- to my grandfather he wouldn't have had to go try to defend himself. He lost, by the way. Had to pay a fine and take some classes. He probably deserved more than he got, but it was something.
Examples of doctor negligence involve patients' complaints not being taken seriously enough, illnesses being incorrectly diagnosed, GPs refusing to carry out blood tests, incorrect or inappropriate medication being administered, incorrect doses of medication being prescribed, referrals to specialist consultants not being made in time or at all and follow up appointments/treatments not been carried out quickly enough . They can also include serious illnesses (such as cancer) being misdiagnosed as something less serious, broken or fractured bones going undiagnosed due to lack of referral for x-ray, failing to follow-up on a patient’s complaints and concerns, failing to correctly identify an illness or injury and treating an injury or illness in a manner which leads to complications and/or further injury or illness.
Medical malpractice claims are incredibly complex cases, and the laws governing them vary from state to state. Even the most obvious malpractice claims will still require meeting numerous administrative, or claim filing, prerequisites, such as providing the doctor or hospital with notice, or even getting another doctor’s opinion. Some states even have shorter statute of limitations for malpractice claims.
A violation of the standard of care - The law acknowledges that there are certain medical standards that are recognized by the profession as being acceptable medical treatment by reasonably prudent health care professionals under like or similar circumstances. This is known as the standard of care. A patient has the right to expect that health care professionals will deliver care that is consistent with these standards. If it is determined that the standard of care has not been met, then negligence may be established.
In an action against a surgeon for malpractice, the jury should be instructed that the plaintiff must show by a preponderance of the evidence and the jury must find that the defendant in the performance of his service either did some particular thing or things that physicians and surgeons of ordinary skill, care and diligence would not have done under the same or similar circumstances, or that the defendant failed or omitted to do some particular thing or things which physicians and surgeons of ordinary skill, care and diligence would have done under the same or similar circumstances.
The concept of permitting someone to recover damages for injuries caused by someone’s lack of action or failure to do something was a revolutionary concept. Since its recognition as an action in tort, negligence has become a major source of very large jury awards. It is the root of all product liability cases. When people complain about our legal system and the outrageous verdicts being awarded nowadays, they are speaking about negligence.
Despite that fact that the Constitution promises you the right to health care, no one has successfully sued the State for the non-delivery or lack of health care. Several test cases have concluded that, despite the Constitution and the Patients’ Rights Charter, the government has no absolute obligation to provide access to health care. Instead, the government is required to “progressively realise its obligations” to its citizens. In practical terms, this means, for example, that a patient who needs dialysis and cannot be treated because of a lack of facilities cannot sue the State.
I was referred to a GI about my chronic condition that is out of control. when I got through all the red tape and hassle that comes along with Medi-cal I was able to finally go to the appointment. When I got there he refused to treat me or give the most important medication I needed. He said that he does not have experience in my condition because the Asian community rarely has cases of this condition (He is asian and I am not). I told him I am in urgent need for my medications but he said he cannot help and that I need to see another GI. I think he refused because I have Medi-cal because he made a couple of comments on my insurance. and some racism might be involved because of the Asian comment he made and the fact that all the ppl in the waiting room were asian.
Another potential cause of action is intentional infliction of emotional distress. This is based on a doctor’s outrageous conduct that intentionally or recklessly causes a patient to suffer severe emotional distress. This must be beyond a mere slight as it must be something that would outrage society. The common law tort required a physical manifestation of injury, but most jurisdictions no longer require this element. This cause of action has been successful in some cases in which patients recorded their doctors performing medical treatment while mocking and ridiculing the patient to a serious degree.
The doctor acted negligently. The doctor acted negligently if the doctor failed to ask you certain questions, forgot to send the blood test to the proper lab, gave a fake name for your illness and other practices which a similar doctor with the same experience would never have done. To prove this, you will have to show that a reasonable doctor would have recognized your medical problem from your symptoms and diagnosed you appropriately.
That’s impossible. A reputable personal injury attorney will not charge you for an initial consultation. Michaels & Smolak will give you a free consultation. If we decide to represent you, we will charge you on a contingency fee basis, which is usually 1/3 of the net recovery we obtain for you, whether from a settlement or from a jury. Since the initial consultation is free, why wait? Contact us today for a free consultation.
The Indiana Medical Malpractice Act spells out the procedures to follow if you suspect that you have a hospital malpractice claim or any type of medical malpractice lawsuit. The first step is to obtain your medical records and have medical experts review them and determine whether the hospital or hospital staff involved in your treatment provided substandard care that caused your injury.
One exception to the general rule of informed consent is that of therapeutic privilege. While uncommon, doctor’s cannot be held responsible for untruths about a patient’s health when a worse threat could exist with complete disclosure. Such an example would be when the revelation of a debilitating condition might prompt suicidal actions on the part of the patient.