Medical Malpractice Is Wrong

Medical malpractice happens when a hospital, doctor or other health care professional, perform negligence through their practice and causes an injury to a patient, it may be the result of mistakes in diagnosis, management and after care or health management. (Podgers, 2007)

In “Judicial Approach to Medical Malpractice Reform”, Barbara G. Taft addresses the constitutional debate between state supreme courts and state legislation in regards to amending medical malpractice for their unconstitutional rulings. Taft adds that even though states have “sovereignty” over medical malpractice responsibility, congress holds the capacity to overrule state statutes through the “Commerce Clause of the U.S Constitution”.

He said the union was waiting to see what the results of the Fire Department's investigation would be.

“Medical malpractice occurs when a hospital, doctor or other health care professional, through a negligent act or omission, causes an injury to a patient. The negligence might be the result of errors in diagnosis, treatment, aftercare or health management.” (Admin) One of the most common type of claims that pharmacies face are negligence claims. Negligence is one of the categories that falls under the area of law called Torts. In the Hundley v Rite Aid case, a tort was filed for injuries that were sustained by Gabrielle Hundley after she took medication from an incorrectly filed prescription. The case involved a jury trial verdict involving Gabrielle Hundley, a minor child, against Howard Jones, the pharmacist, and the Rite

According to Attorney.com, Ohio malpractice law defines medical malpractice as when a medical professional, such as a doctor or a nurse, or a medical institution, such as a hospital, injures a patient during the course of a treatment. Furthermore, for this injury to be able to be considered medical malpractice, the doctor's actions must represent a breach, or violation, of the standard of care. A standard of care is defined as the generally accepted practices and procedures that all medical professionals in the area would administer for a patient suffering from a particular ailment. This standard of care varies depending on a number of factors, including the patient's general health as well as his or her age.

The Verdict (Lumet, Zanuck, & Brown, 1982) is a powerful film about medical malpractice and the concealment of evidence. A young woman arrived at a Catholic hospital to give birth. The admitting nurse noted in the patient’s history that the patient ate within one hour of admission. The anesthesiologist neglected to review the patient’s history prior to administering the anesthetic. (Patients cannot go under anesthesia safely if they have eaten within nine hours of the procedure.) The patient aspirated her stomach contents causing her to stop breathing. Without oxygen for several minutes, the patient became brain damaged and went into a persistent vegetative state. When the patient’s sister sued the anesthesiologist and archdiocese for

Medical Malpractice consists of negligence committed by a medical professional. There are many possible events that can occur in the practice of medicine. When physician make a medical error it could possible result in an injury. We often put our faith in doctor to make the right medical decision for us. However, medical malpractice does not always hold up since some patient can take advance of the system. There are some defenses that exist when talking about the medical malpractice.

Section 1: In the first section of the paper, you should give careful thought to how you might define the policy problem.

Medical malpractice can take many forms, such as failing to diagnose a serious medical condition, misdiagnosis, adverse reactions, and anesthesia, surgical, and medication errors. It is important to note that not all medical errors constitute medical malpractice; thus, it is crucial that you speak with an experienced malpractice lawyer to determine if negligence has taken place and what your legal options are.

In the healthcare field, one of the rudimentary rules first learned is maleficent, “to do no harm.” However, medical malpractice seems to be skyrocketing throughout the years. In 2010, according to the American Medical Association (AMA), the United States was experiencing its third full blown medicine liability crisis with many physicians’ practices becoming limited due to increasing malpractice costs (Ellington, 2010). According to Sage (2012), United States has the most expensive healthcare system in the world and a high rate of litigation. Under the healthcare delivery system, it is viewed as far from perfect and the primary cause for high unjustified medical spending. As well as, the largest financial damages awarded to successful plaintiffs

Physicians have been known to use Defensive medicine techniques to help guard themselves against malpractice lawsuits. The problem with using defensive medicine techniques is that it is regarded as prescribing unnessary test, procedures, and checkup appointments (chap. 12). All of these added unnecessary medical treatment and documentation contributes to the growing cost of health care in the United States (U.S.) (chap. 12). Physicians who use the defensive medicine techniques also have a higher risk of having a malpractice lawsuit that will lead to malpractice awards and an increase in insurance premiums that will add to the increase in health care costs (chap. 12). Even though the defensive medicine is viewed as an intervention, it is

Patients put a lot of trust in their doctors and physicians. We believe that they are trained to diagnose properly. They are scientists who base their predictions on chemical and physical evidence and with years of school and training arrive at a conclusion. However, they are human and can make mistakes. Almost 20% of patients are misdiagnosed. Some are simple and innocuous while others can be life-threatening. The typical behavior for a trained physician who is not sure of their answer is to resist the quick diagnosis and recommend the patient to a specialist or another doctor for a second opinion. Misdiagnosis can lead to incorrect treatments and unneeded surgeries, all the while, putting the patient at risk and missing the opportunity to treat the real disease while allowing the condition to worsen.

Expert witnesses play a unique role in medical malpractice lawsuits. Many of the issues debated in these cases, such as whether a surgery was performed correctly, are too complex for juries and judges to understand on their own.

In order to claim that a doctor or hospital was negligent in a medical malpractice case, there must be specific requirements present. First off a doctor-patient relationship must have existed (Boeschen, 2014). An individual making the claim must show that there was a physician-patient relationship with the doctor being sued. This means the doctor was hired and agreed to be hired for the medical care provided. If a doctor began seeing you and treating you, it is easy to prove a physician-patient relationship existed. Second the plaintiff must show the doctor was negligent. Regardless of if the patient is unhappy with their treatment or results, does not determine the doctor is liable for medical malpractice. The doctor must have been negligent -- not reasonably skillful and careful -- in a diagnosis or treatment (Boeschen, 2014). To sue for malpractice, you must be able to show that the doctor caused you harm in a way that a competent doctor, under the same circumstances would not have (Boeschen, 2014). In many cases, the doctor's care is not required to be the best possible, but simply "reasonably skillful and careful” (Boeschen, 2014). Whether or not the doctor was reasonably skillful and careful is often up to the medical malpractice claim.

Imagine you are injured or sick and have sought a doctor’s help. Although you trusted your doctor, something, something seemingly very in control of the doctor, went wrong. You are angry and confused, but also think of the commonality of medical malpractice. So, why do doctors, who are supposed to help, harm? Though many flaws influence it, malpractice can be, and often is unintentional. Most doctors aren’t trained to harm their patients. Inexperience and lack of medical discovery led to unintentional suffering of the patient. Personal flaws, like lack of willingness to abandon previous medical methods and shortcomings in communication also harm patients. Further reasons why doctors harm are socio-medical understandings that breed hate, prejudices stemming from a society’s belief about certain people, such as the medical practice under the Nazi regime. Additionally, displayed in the case of Ignác Semmelweis, judgement of one to oneself can be detrimental to any progress one’s ideas could make. We will examine these concepts through Jerome Groopman’s “Flesh-and-Blood Decision Making”, Sherwin Nuland’s The Doctors’ Plague and Barbara Bachrach’s “In the Name of Public Health”. Those who practice medicine are, unfortunately, unfree from the imperfections that plague all of humanity. Through these intimate and varied faults, doctors do harm.