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)
What is malpractice? The given definition is improper, illegal, or negligent professional activity or treatment, especially by a medical practitioner, lawyer, or public official. These cases are occurring more all over the state than they should be due to human era. The people at the hands of doctors are being let down as well as left with disfiguration or even death. These cases are leaving people to question their surgeons as well as the nurses attending with them.
For decades doctors have been revered, respected, and regarded as “saviors,” but what medical practitioners and health officials do not reveal is that there are some doctors that are unlawfully practicing medicine, and nothing is being done to stop them. Medical malpractice is the illegal or improper practice of medicine. Unfortunately, this is far too common. The people that are victims of malpractice often get no compensation for the problems a physician has created. Although doctors are trusted individuals and have a right to provide medical advice, perform surgeries, and prescribe medicine, patients should also be able to have more control and security in their medical dealings through new laws and regulations.
A second issue is malpractice. Malpractice issues are always present in an unstable environment where patients will seek to remedy an incident if they feel they have been harmed (Hamric, 2009). It is important to always act in a reasonable way as a health care clinician but unfortunately there are always those who are negligent in their actions as practitioners.
For a plaintiff to triumph a claim of medical malpractice for negligence, four elements must be established. The first element is proving the defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff. The second is to show that the defendant breached the duty to the plaintiff. The third is to show that the plaintiff was harmed and experienced damages. Finally, the fourth is to show that the plaintiff was harmed by the actions of the defendant (Greenberg, 2009).
Medical malpractice, the negligence of a health professional in diagnosing, treating, and or caring for a patient, is a specific tort law under the negligence torts. In the medical field, the tort reform has affected many people including doctors, lawyers, insurance company owners and workers, patients, and including other citizens. While large corporations, doctors, and other defendants are benefitting from caps on damages, that is limiting the amount of money that can be granted in court, plaintiffs, lawyers, and citizens are affected differently. Doctor Sage stated in an interview that he has, “never felt that caps on damages had a major effect on patients one way or the other” (“Could Malpractice”). This remark makes those injured question about
This proceeding before a Medical Review Panel, pursuant to La. Rev. Stat. §§ 40:1299.41, et seq., is brought by Jimmy Martinez against multiple health care providers, including Dr. Mark Kappelman, a qualified health care provider entitled to have the claim filed against him reviewed by this Panel. The claims made against Dr. Kappelman are mere allegations without support and proof. In a medical malpractice case the burden of proof is on the claimant to establish that Dr. Mark Kappelman’s actions in this matter fell below the standard of care required of similar health care providers. The claimant also bears the burden of proving whether any such alleged act or acts of negligence caused any injuries. It is the duty of the
The Plaintiffs felt that since the hospital was licensed and accredited that they should be held responsible for their employees and their actions. It states in the regulations that any infraction of the bylaws imposes liability for the injury. At any time if Dr. Alexander had questions or concerns he could have reached out to an expert in this field to consult
One approach to minimize large amounts of tort claims for medical malpractice is to put a cap on non-economical awards. Tort reform is the response; a tort is a civil lawsuit for damages over private wrongs other than breach of contract. According to Lau and Johnson (2014), a tort can be categorized into three categories: intentional tort, when tortfeasor acted with intent, negligence, if the tortfeasor did not act intentionally, but failed to act as a reasonable person, and lastly, strict liability, if the tortfeasor is engaged in certain activities, which caused injury or death due to it. The massive medical malpractice cases across the nation have made defending frivolous lawsuits is a national problem; ultimately, the general public
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.
Medical malpractice claims have risen dramatically over the past 40 years alongside the financial claim awards (Kessler, 2011). Currently, America’s medical tort system is regulated and enforced primarily by the states (“Medical Tort System,” 2016). The main focus of tort law is to preserve the peace between two parties, to determine fault and discourage wrong doing (Pozgar, 2016). Most physicians today carry medical malpractice insurance to protect themselves from the high defense costs of claims and potential financial awards (Kessler, 2011). As the number of medical claims increase and jury awarded punitive damage skyrocket, medical malpractice insurance premiums have also risen dramatically (Kessler, 2011). Malpractice insurance
Across the country, there are calls for medical malpractice tort reform based on the perception of frivolous lawsuits by patients with patients without valid claims and less-than-scrupulous lawyers are willing to prosecute them. On the one hand, the fact that some plaintiffs have received enormous settlements as a result of their medical malpractice lawsuits further fuels the debate that tort reform is needed to avoid these types of settlements that are incongruent with the facts. On the other hand, though, few observers would likely argue that some type of medical malpractice protections are required in order to protect patients from truly substandard and dangerous medical care practices and to compensate them for their injuries when these eventualities occur. One state that has implemented reasonable malpractice statutes and procedures that avoid these two extremes is Ohio where legislators passed tort reform laws in 2002. By contrast, many of the State of Michigan's laws on medical malpractice date back 40 years. This paper provides a description of the provisions of the medical malpractice statutes and procedures from these two states, followed by a summary of the research and important findings in the conclusion.
Malpractice is the failure to provide professional services with the skill usually exhibited by responsible and careful members of the profession, resulting in injury, loss, or damage to the party contracting those services. Though accountants, lawyers, and other professionals can be charged with malpractice, the term is most commonly associated with medical professionals (e.g., doctors, nurses, hospital technicians.) Liability in malpractice depends on whether "a physician meets a legally required standard of care" (Greenberg 2011). Most medical malpractice suits are for negligence on the part of medical professionals in providing this expected level of care. In recent decades, partially as a consequence of medical costs, there has been a considerable expansion of medical malpractice suits, though the number of malpractice claims represents only a small percentage (about 3%) of all cases of actual negligence. State tort provisions do "influence litigation risk and malpractice insurance is used to mitigate this risk" (Linville 2011).
On the other hand, malpractice liability is a valid concern because in such “cases hospitals can be held liable for allowing an incompetent physician to provide services in the facility” ( Harris, 2014, p 134) . In this type of case, a patient can not only sue the physician for the alleged negligence in diagnosis or treatment, patient
Medical malpractice lawsuits are an extremely serious topic and have affected numerous patients, doctors, and hospitals across the country. Medical malpractice is defined as “improper, unskilled or negligent treatment of a patient by a physician, dentist, nurse, pharmacist, or other health care professional” (Medical malpractice, n.d.). If a doctor acts negligent and causes harm to a patient, malpractice lawsuits arise. Negligence is the concept of the liability concerning claims of medical malpractice, making this type of litigation part of tort law. Tort law provides that one person may litigate negligence to recover damages for personal injury. Negligence laws are designed to deter careless behavior and also to