At my GP surgery I’m pretty sure half the battle is wether the receptionist thinks your exaggerating ! A few months back I caught flu from my daughter, after a week the fever, headache and severe cough hadn’t subsided. I have asthma so knew it was a good idea to call to be sure I didn’t have a chest infection. I managed to be granted a telephone consultation with the nurse who oodly prescribed a nose spray thinking the head pain was actually my sinus’s (never had sinus issues) a week on no change but the cough was horrific with all sorts coming up. Called again got a telephone consultation with GP, he prescribed a low dose of antibiotic an said it’s most likely viral. 1 week on after feeling slight relief I started feeling extreemly wheezy with not much change to the cough. The 2nd day I called I demanded to see someone as I couldn’t see how my chest could be Assesed over the phone. Then I got an appointment with the nurse at the minor ailments clinic(minor difficulty breathing) I was straight away placed on a nebulizer, my sats were low and nurse said I had pneumonia. A month later still not feeling quite right my asthma meds were increased. 1 month on again another course of steroids and then they agreed I probably should have an xray. 5 hrs late they call saying I need a ct scan but will have to be in a waiting list. All this caused me severe anxiety and when I saw a dr and broke down he literally made me feel a complete waste of time. Since I’ve felt awful but am too embarrassed to go back so have to hope this is all just anxiety. As soon as my referals through I’ll be leaving that surgery as I have zero confidence in them
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.
Lets make it psychiatric: A psychiatrist recommends lamotrigine and warns of the risk of fatal skin rash. The patient asks the psychiatrist whether any of her patients has suicided. She lies and says no. The patient sloughs her skin, almost dies, discovers the lie and sues. She says if she had know the doctor has lost a patient to suicide she would have found another psychiatrist.
However, an attorney may be able to help you file a law suit against the negligent physician. When seeking your legal expert, the single most important factor is the attorney’s reputation. If you hire an attorney that is notorious for settling claims for less than they’re worth, you are less likely to receive the money you deserve. For more information on attorneys and the legal processes involved in medical malpractice law suits, please read our article Medical Malpractice and the Legal Process
No matter your jurisdiction, medical malpractice claims and lawsuits are primarily about one thing: accountability. People trust that doctors will take care of them and make their condition better in a patient’s hour of need. When doctors fail in that responsibility, they must be held accountable for the negligent actions they took – as well as for the actions that they failed to take under the circumstances.
This combination destroyed my life over the last 5 years. Am I to blame, in the diseased state of addiction, because I requested these drugs? I’m sure, to some degree. Is my Dr. to blame for over-medicating me then kicking me to the curb with multiple addictions that no doctor would ever care for – once everything fell apart financially (and everything else for that matter) for me 5 years later? He absolutely is, and I plan on suing him.
The hospital may be found liable for negligence if it did not ensure that hospital staff had the required education, ongoing training or licensure. Additionally, it may be liable for not properly checking the backgrounds of other individuals who are not direct employees, such as surgeons or attending physicians, who administer care to patients. If a patient’s condition worsened because he or she had to wait longer because there was not adequate staff, the hospital may be found to be negligent.
Prior to his presidency, Abraham Lincoln was a distinguished medical malpractice attorney, taking on cases for physicians and patients alike. Lincoln represented two defendant physicians who treated a man when a chimney fell on him. The physicians applied splints to the patient's legs, assuming he would not survive his injuries. The patient survived and was left with a crooked right leg when the splints were removed. The man recruited six attorneys, 15 physician witnesses and 21 other witnesses in his suit against the two physicians. Lincoln presented the town's only other 12 physicians. Harking to the modern statute of limitations and the importance of fresh and compelling evidence, Lincoln believed the best defense was the passage of time and so he obtained many postponements. The trial resulted in a hung jury.
Generally speaking, from a legal standpoint, you may need to evaluate whether the risk of being left without legal redress in the event of a medical mistake is worth the potential cost savings of having your procedure performed overseas. With such limited remedies available to patients, and the often lower standards of care in nations offering substantially cheaper medical treatment rates, the risks of medical tourism may far exceed the benefits.
There is a statute of limitations (or time limit in which you can file a lawsuit) for medical malpractice cases. This limit varies from state to state, but in general it is about two years from when the injury occurred. To ensure you file a claim before the statute of limitations is up, you should reach out to a medical malpractice attorney as soon after you realize doctor error occurred.
The 1960's and 1970's also saw the emergence of the doctrine of informed consent. Modern medicine requires that medical professionals disclose all of the associated risks that accompany a given procedure. This way, if a treatment or procedure entails serious or deterrent risk, the patient may make an informed personal decision to refuse it, such is their right. During these two decades, it became a fundamental tenant of biomedical ethics that a patient is informed of all the risks in a procedure. Failure to warn patients of possible adverse outcomes could become an additional source of liability for physicians and medical professionals. Legislatures eventually got down to the task of explicitly defining what information must be disclosed, and what constitute a "lack" of informed consent. The definition tiptoed around the issues of emergency care, patient-provider relationships, “common” knowledge, consent on behalf of a minor, and whether a given risk would deter a “reasonable” person from accepting treatment. Lawmakers set about drafting ironclad informed consent law that covered the ifs, ands and buts of most conceivable situations that required informed medical consent. In the same era, courts discarded the doctrine of charitable immunity which had previously immunized charitable institutions from suit.
Doctor Mistake, No Injury to Patient – Not all medical errors cause injury to the patient. For example, a doctor may prescribe the incorrect dosage of medication. The patient then takes the wrong dose, has a temporary reaction, and reports it to the doctor or pharmacist. If the error is caught before the patient suffers any serious or lasting injuries, then this would be considered a mistake on the doctor’s fault but would not be considered medical malpractice. The lack of harm to the patient does not erase the fact that the doctor made a serious mistake. In this situation, however, this would not be considered medical malpractice by the doctor because there is no lasting harm to the patient.
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.
I thought my first encounter with my new psychiatrist was traumatic but after reading everyone's comments I don't feel like I was abused as badly as so many of you were. I am doing research because this doctor was so rude and unprofessional that I actually was traumatized when I left his office after our first session. After reading and doing some research I have found that unfortunately I can not sue him for medical malpractice but you can bet I am going to report him to every medical organization I can. I have already gone to the hospital and spoken to upper management and they have forced him to prescribe my medication in the correct quantity after he lied to me in session and told me he could only prescribe a 30 day quantity. How am I supposed to make it through the other 2 months before my next appointment with him if I only have a 30 day supply? Idiot. He was irritated with me because even though he had my chart (my regular doctor abruptly left her practice 8 days before my scheduled appointment with her) and I was shuffled to this clown and they sent all my records to him (or so they said). He kept asking ME which of the meds listed on my chart were my psych meds and got irritated when I told him I didn't know. That's when I started to get nervous. If he was a real doctor, how is it he couldn't pick out the psych meds from everything else on my list? He asked me why I was taking so many anti-depressants. I thought to myself--that's a stupid question-I am the patient, I didn't prescribe them so how would I be able to even begin to answer that question? He explained that giving anti-depressants to a bipolar was like giving them rocket fuel. Then he snickered and said that maybe I had pissed off my last doctor( I suppose as an explanation for why she was overmedicating me and according to his opinion after seeing me for all of 15 minutes that I was too manic) As he perused my chart he saw something he didn't like and he said, "Shit!" I thought ok, that wasn't very professional. As he proceeded to ask questions, when I answered them (or I should say tried to answer them) he would interrupt me when he felt he'd gotten the information he needed and he'd say, " ok, that's all I need to know". He cut me off mid-sentence repeatedly as if I was wasting his time and he wanted me to just shut up once he got what he wanted for his purposes. One of my conditions is bipolar and somehow the question of being highly sexual came up and he said, "Oh, so you were promiscuous." I have never had anyone use that kind of terminology to describe that particular symptom. I have read books, magazines, done on-line research about bipolar ever since my diagnosis and I have not encountered that wording to describe the condition. I was shocked to hear a doctor use that term. I felt like he had called me a whore. At least that's how I felt. He asked me about working with other doctors and I shared that I had one doctor who never shared or gave any feedback and he laughed and said, "Well, then you won't like me, because I don't give feedback either." I thought to myself, how is it funny that a psychiatrist doesn't give a patient any kind of feedback at all? How is he going to now how my meds are working or if they aren't, and how am I supposed to know the same thing if he never interacts with me?" The icing on the cake was when he abruptly stopped speaking in the middle of his instructions about my meds and said, "OK, time's up, our session is over." I was so surprised I really had no idea what to say. I sat there for a minute trying to collect myself and to see if he was serious and he just kept staring at me, so I said,"Um, well, if you think it's not important to give me instructions on my meds, then I guess I have to leave since you are telling me to go." I was floundering at this point because I honestly had no idea what I was going to do. They tell you to take your meds, take your meds, take your meds, because it is so important that you stay on your regime once your doctor gets you started, and so many people with bipolar stop once they feel better, but I knew how wild my life had been before I was finally diagnosed so I am totally dedicated to staying on medications and here was my doctor kicking me out of his office without my meds. I was totally freaked out. Then he said, "No, I'm going to finish giving you your instructions, but I wanted to make a point of it that you were late and that now you are cutting into my next patient's time. I had been on time but I did stop at the desk to write my co-pay which took all of maybe 2 or 3 minutes. He finished his instructions to me and as I was leaving he said, "Remember, if you want respect, you have to give respect." And then he instructed me to be early to my next visit. I suppose to be sure that I didn't spend 3 minutes writing out my co-pay. I was so freaked out, I felt like a criminal for almost three days because I believed I had been so bad. Thank goodness, I've had several good doctors over the years, and as I processed it more and more I started to get angry. Really, really angry. I won't even go into the run around I got from the sorry excuse they have for a patient liason who was absolutely no help. As a matter of fact, after dealing with her, I was even angrier. I was torn between pursuing the matter further or just letting it go because I knew I was going to run out of meds in 30 days and then what? But this week after seeing my talk therapist and being able to compare my reactions to hers, I realized that HE was the one who had been wildly inappropriate and that he had been unprofessional, rude, and actually, just downright mean. I have no idea why people like that are even allowed to practice medicine. Especially the kind of medicine where they can really mess someone up with medication and with inappropriate or cruel behavior. So I drove to the hospital, demanded to see anyone who was not that excuse for a patient liason, got a printed copy of my patient's rights (which I did not know existed had I not seen them posted on the wall at the front desk when I went in that day) They called and I got to speak to someone in risk management (so apparently the patient liason person lied to me when she said she did not report to anyone and refused to let me have the corporate address and said they only people above her were the doctors and they would not want to speak to me about my issue)
Doctor's surgeries also have a legal duty to provide an acceptable level of care to their patients. This will take into consideration issues such as waiting times, diagnoses and administration. If the surgery fails to reach the standards reasonably expected of the medical profession, and this directly harms their patients, the doctor's surgery will have been negligent.
This Health Policy Report describes the malpractice system in the United States, examines its shortcomings, and analyzes the forces that have led to past and current malpractice crises. The authors review options for reform of the U.S. malpractice system. Conventional tort reforms include caps on damages, limits on attorneys' fees, and shortening of the statute of limitations. Experts have also proposed major system reforms, such as enterprise liability or administrative compensation.
A 1996 study by Daniel P. Kessler and Mark McClellan analyzing data on elderly Medicare beneficiaries treated for two serious cardiac diseases in 1984, 1987, and 1990 determined that "malpractice reforms that directly reduce provider liability pressure lead to reductions of 5 to 9 percent in medical expenditures without substantial effects on mortality or medical complications."
We often get asked the question whether an active-duty military service member can sue the United States. The short answer to this question is that it depends on the claim your bringing. The general rule is that under Feres v United States, a service member may not recover under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) for claims which arise out of or in the course of activity incident to their service. Courts often refer to this as the Feres Doctrine. Whether your claim falls within the scope of Feres is a complicated legal question that usually requires the assistance of a lawyer. There is no clear cut answer on when a serviceman’s death, injury, or loss is “incident to service.” The words incident to service appear no where in the Federal Tort Claims Act, but have been interpreted into the FTCA by the United States Supreme Court.
My son was diagnosed in his teens with ADHD Paranoid schizophrenia which he was prescribed rispiridone which stabilized his condition slightly but as an adult he couldn't tollorate the side affects any longer and his team (lol) changed it over 2 years ago, since then it's been a living hell. He has been in a psychotic state since and no one is helping him, he totally believes what he thinks is happening to him is real and he has no mental illness, teams (lol) have seen him periodically and he convinced them it is all real and walked away! Fuelling his beliefs although it has been proved by the police numerous times the GP blood tests and a&e visits that nothing is being put in his water supply food etc but yet he still TRUELY believes he's being targeted and drugged. I've tried and tried to tell his GP, rang the local mental health units and told them, rang his adolescent psychiatrist who was brilliant when he was a teen but did nothing as an adult as they are moving and he wouldn't work with them after the visit to his home to section him in which they left believing him, but to my son it is real he's delusional, psychotic, violent, demanding, they are ment to be professionals! I no longer live near my son due to health issues, spinal injuries, ms/me hemoplegic migraine amongst others, so my youngest son who lives 2 mins away from my elder with the schizophrenia has now become his frontline resulting in my youngest son becoming depressed and selfharms with all the pressure and stress! Adolescent mental health care brilliant in till they are an adult then they are dropped like a stone and family has to cope best they can no matter what it does to them physically or mentally. We're all at breaking point. If he'd of had learning difficulties he'd get the help but because he's autistic and very intelligent they believe every word no matter the text, vids, messages on social media that prove his mental state, he is now facing eviction because of his psychosis. This is 100% true every word, this is care in the community, what an utter let down not fit for purpose in any way shape or form, if I hadn't experienced the neglect of care I wouldn't of believed the state of our mental health profession, they are duty bound to give help and most if all CARE, I feel that in the near future I will be seeking a solicitor to take this matter further.
Cavendish ruled that a physician could be held liable if and when they harmed a patient as a result of negligence while stipulating that a physician who diligently adhered to the standard of care would not be liable even if he accomplished no cure. A legal precursor to expert testimony came in 1532, when a law passed under the reign of Holy Roman Emperor Charles V, requiring the opinion of medical men to be taken in cases of violent death. In 1768, Sir William Blackstone penned Commentaries on the Laws of England, in which he recruited the Latin term “mala praxis” to describe the concept of professional negligence, or ‘tort' in modern parlance. Blackstone noted that mala praxis “breaks the trust which the party had placed in his physician, and tends to the patient's destruction.” The proper term of ‘malpractice' was coined sometime thereafter, deriving from Blackstone's work.
If the injured patient is able to prove – through qualified expert testimony – that the doctor committed an act of medical negligence, then the patient has satisfied the first step of proving a malpractice claim against the doctor. However, the injured patient must also be able to show that the doctor’s negligence resulted in certain injuries or damages.
But Clink, this isn't a case of the patient saying "If only I had known about this" it's a case of the patient saying "If the doctor hadn't lied about this when I asked." Those are two very different things. In the former case, you could say that it was something that the patient hadn't thought of beforehand and that the doctor wasn't obligated to disclose. In the latter, the patient did think about it beforehand, expressed that they considered it to be something that they needed to know, and the doctor deliberately gave them inaccurate information. You can't draw a line from one to the other that easily.
DJ I understand where you are coming from, and I also understand those that dont agree with you. I have 3 bulging disc/ degenerative disc disease. Until the age of 30 I never touched an opiate or abused anything for that matter. My injury stemmed for a high school sports injury, but I dealt with the pain by eating right, exercising and took a Tylenol when needed. At the age of 30 the pain started getting much worse I because my job and the businesses I owned demanded me to work long hours and were physically demanding. So when I just couldnt take it any longer I went to the doctor who prescribed me percocets for about 3 or 4 months and then referred me to pain mgmt. I really liked the doctor, he was kind, compassionate, empathetic, smart and unrelated he was interested in me as a person, he actually visited a few of my businesses, we didn’t hang out or anything but I thought of him as a friend in a way but understood we weren’t. So now that you understand this I want to make it very clear I never tried to take advantage of that, not once did I ever ask for a certain medication. I just felt blessed that I had a doctor that actually cared for my well being and that I was not just a jane doe diagnosed and treated by the statistics. He started me off with oxy and injections. The injections were not working so long story short we tried a wide variety of meds, most either didn’t work for me or I had an adverse reaction to. Finally after a few years I was put on opana and oxy and it worked. The problem was his practice got busy and so did he. The result was he was still nice but he did all the talking and it was mostly like”its been a couple months on this dose your tolerance has increased so let’s up your dosage”, until I was at 30mg opana 2x day and 30mg oxy 3x day. Things were fine for awhile but the drugs start to change my temperament. My work started to suffer, my relationships also were becoming strained, because my whole life revolved around my medications, yes I was pain free but at what cost? So here lies the the million dollar question. Who’s fault is it? Mine for wanting to be pain free and trusting that my doctor giving more and more was in my best interest, yes in a way it is my fault for being nieve to the fact I was going to beable to pop these powerful drugs for the rest of my life. So the government decides to crack down and me on this insane amount of opiates and doc takes meds away, what a sick cruel joke on me. So now knowing what I know, my doctor put me on opana because of kickbacks and kept increasing dosage because of $ and I know this because a majority of his patients are in the same boat, they topped out and all is fine till the government cracked down and doc got scared, reduced or dropped patient and we all are so surprised why the US is now flooded with heroin addicts. So my opinion is the doctors that were prescribing ridiculously large amounts to fatten there pockets, even if they weren’t doing for the kickbacks, and used tolerance or whatever, we trusted that they would have been smart enough to see what was happening in this country and when the government once again passed legislation without thinking about the result of there actions, these doctors would have a game plan, but no they all held up there hands and want to blame it on anybody but themselves. Shame on you doctor’s that liked playing the game while you were winning but quit and ran home crying when the rules of the game changed, that is why I hold you doctors responsible, and I do feel bad for the good ones that get fucked in the process, but didn’t us patients with real pain get fucked by doctor shoppers? Stand up for yourselves, get oganized and counter sued the government for passing legislation(unrealistic restrictions without making sure these poor people have a realistic way to get off theses doses safely, at no cost. Isn’t funny how these pill pushing doctor’s do a 180 because the big money can’t be made by having their patients hooked on powerful opiates so they jump ship accusing them off being addicts dropping them and putting them on suboxane which is not a pain medication and wonder why they have no choice but to become heroin addicts. I blame the doctors for turning us into pill addicts but I blame the government for turning us into heroin addicts. In the end tne patient loses because whoever is at fault the patient will suffer
I happen to agree with your statement about there being a possibility for future cancer patients not getting the treatment they need if I was to take further action. But I wonder what exactly makes you assume that I am “living on welfare looking for even more “free money””? Ever consider that my cancer diagnosis wasn’t the only reason I am on disability? And really?? Did you read the post where I said I’m okay with coming off the meds? Its difficult, yes. But i have a choice every day to simply call up any unscrupulous doctor and get a prescription any time I want. I don’t do that. I’m sticking with the doctor who is weening me, because I believe it needs to be done. All you seem to have read was that I want more medicine, when I don’t.
Medical malpractice claims don’t only cover errors in diagnosis and treatment. Once you’ve established a doctor-patient relationship, the doctor owes you a duty of care and treatment with the degree of skill, care, and diligence as possessed by, or expected of, a reasonably competent physician under the same or similar circumstances. Part of that duty of care is to be forthcoming with your diagnosis, treatment options and prognosis, as reasonably competent physicians would not lie to their patients.
According to the Institute of Medicine, up to 98,000 people die in hospitals in the United States every year as a result of medical errors that could have been prevented. These medical errors are the eighth leading cause of death in the United States, which is higher than motor vehicle accidents. Victims of medical malpractice and their family members do have legal rights to sue a hospital in the event that negligent medical care causes an injury or death.
Breaking up with your doctor is not a choice most people take lightly, but there may come a time when it's the single best decision for you and your health. Some patients have had complaints that have been mounting over the years. Others decide to fire their doctor after one heated episode - perhaps because of a missed diagnosis like Della Casa, a disagreeable interaction, or a health concern that was dismissed.
My son was diagnosed in his teens with ADHD Paranoid schizophrenia which he was prescribed rispiridone which stabilized his condition slightly but as an adult he couldn't tollorate the side affects any longer and his team (lol) changed it over 2 years ago, since then it's been a living hell. He has been in a psychotic state since and no one is helping him, he totally believes what he thinks is happening to him is real and he has no mental illness, teams (lol) have seen him periodically and he convinced them it is all real and walked away! Fuelling his beliefs although it has been proved by the police numerous times the GP blood tests and a&e visits that nothing is being put in his water supply food etc but yet he still TRUELY believes he's being targeted and drugged. I've tried and tried to tell his GP, rang the local mental health units and told them, rang his adolescent psychiatrist who was brilliant when he was a teen but did nothing as an adult as they are moving and he wouldn't work with them after the visit to his home to section him in which they left believing him, but to my son it is real he's delusional, psychotic, violent, demanding, they are ment to be professionals! I no longer live near my son due to health issues, spinal injuries, ms/me hemoplegic migraine amongst others, so my youngest son who lives 2 mins away from my eld
Once this data has been collected, the case moves into the actual trial phase, at which point the plaintiff (you) has the legal burden of demonstrating that malpractice occurred, which boils down to proving three main things: that a doctor-patient relationship existed in which the doctor was negligent; that the result of the negligence was direct or proximate harm; and that damages were incurred as a result of the negligence and the harm. The best way to ensure an excellent settlement for our clients is to make sure that we are well prepared and ready to go to trial. That way if the defendant’s malpractice insurance company is being unreasonable we will be ready to successfully present your case to a jury.
The act of filing a complaint against a physician triggers a state medical board investigation of the physician for possible disciplinary action. Realistically, there is only an extremely small chance that your complaint will result in disciplinary action against the physician. Because state medical boards are composed of doctors, they likely feel a personal and professional kinship with the people they regulate and may be hesitant to discipline another member of their own profession.
The lady in risk management was very nice and very sympathetic and apologized profusely for everyone who had behaved badly. She forced the doctor to send in a prescription for the correct quantity of the med he had lied about and claimed was an opiod. I checked with my mail-in pharmacy and with two local pharmacists where I live and they all said that my med is definitely not an opiod and that a 90 day quantity is done all the time. So I had to pay almost $80.00 for the 30 day script the incompetent doctor sent in, and then when he was forced to send in another script that was correct, I will have to pay $120.00. Had he done what he was supposed to do from the start, I would not have had to pay the unnecessary expense of the $80.00. So, I know my experience was not nearly as harrowing as many of the ones I have read, but I have to agree with all of you. There really are some incredibly bad, incompetent, and I'd go so far as to say evil doctors out there. Who knows? Maybe they are crazy too, and they are taking it out on their patients and they just haven't been caught yet. All I know is that I've had incompetent doctors before, but I have NEVER had one who was just so nasty, so unprofessional, and who made me feel like I just needed to take a shower after I'd been in his presence. People like that should have their licenses revoked. They do more harm than good and they have no business being in this line of work.
Go see another doctor. And, I'll go out on a limb here with this word to the wise: physicians are uncomfortable with patients they don't know who demand specific medications. "The patient reports the symptoms and the doctor selects the treatment" is the model that doctors are comfortable with. Of course, where there is a chronic condition, the patient becomes familiar and knowledgeable with the treatment options and knows what will work. But you have heard of "secret shoppers" in a retail context? Physicians worry about "sting patients" and they can get very unyielding when the patient is too directive about meds. Just take it for what its worth; no need to defend.
You're extremely confident in your opinion. Have you considered the possibility that neither of you is interpreting reality on an objective level and that you are actually harming your son based on that absolutism? Saying that it's 100% true seems a bit off unless you have a photographic memory, especially when you think that they believe every word of his and are doing the wrong thing.
Many states limit the amount a plaintiff can recover in a medical malpractice lawsuit. For example, subjective damages like “pain and suffering” might be capped at $250,000. In a state with that kind of cap, you wouldn’t be able to recover more than $250,000 plus any medical expenses, lost wages and other “concrete” damages caused by the malpractice.