INTRODUCTION
In the present scenario, medical negligence has been topic of great scrutiny . The number cases filed for negligence are increasing. This is not only harmful for the person affected, but also a matter to be given a great thought of. Doctors through their code of conduct are highly responsible to take care of the patient and such negligent care on their part does not only results in money loss to the party but also serious complications in many cases , and it may many a times result into death of the party.
So medical negligence is not something that can be reprimanded and serious actions needs to be taken against it. As it denigrates the image of doctor in the right thinking people, doctors are seemed to be as sanctified figure.
…show more content…
What is medical negligence?
1.1. What is negligence?
Negligence is failure to take reasonable care while doing an act. Harm cause by negligence is due to carelessness not intentionally .
According to Jay M. Feinman of the Rutgers University School of Law;
The core idea of negligence is that people should exercise reasonable care when they act by taking account of the potential harm that they might foreseeable cause to other people.”
Similarly medical negligence is a professional negligence in which health care provider (doctor) breach his duty which he owes towards the patient. A doctor owes certain duty towards the patient who consults him for illness. Deficiency in this duty which causes injury and death of the patient result the negligence. In medical negligence compensatory damages are awarded to the patient for the injury caused by the doctor negligence
Medical negligence can be seen various times like reasonable care is not taken during the surgery, during delivery of the child etc.
1.2. What happened in the
…show more content…
Elements of medical negligence
Plaintiff has to prove all five elements for successful medical negligence claim :-
1. A duty owned by the doctor :- A legal duty exist whenever a or doctor start doing treatment on a patient
2. Legal duty was breached:- Plaintiff has to prove that defendant failed to take reasonable care
3. Injury caused by breach of duty:- There must a direct and proximate cause of the injury
4. Deviation from the standard care:- plaintiff must show that the standard of care taken by the doctor is less than the generally accepted standard in doctor’s profession
5. Damage: - without damage plaintiff cannot claim for the compensation. He has to show that doctor was negligent in his duties.
4.1. What happened in the movie?
Kareena kapoor has a legal duty towards akshay kumar when she started surgery on him. She breach her duty by leaving her watch in aksahay kumar’s stomach which cause injury to the patient for this akshay kumar could ask for
This case is extremely relevant to what is known as the four D’s of negligence; duty, dereliction, direct cause and damages. Duty is when a doctor and a patient have formed a relationship and said doctor has taken on the responsibility of taking care of the patient. Dereliction or failure to perform a duty, there must be some kind of proof that the doctor somehow neglected the doctor neglected the patient. Direct cause, there must be some kind of proof that what happened to the patient was a direct cause of how the doctor conducted himself or his failure to act which resulted in injury. Damages a patient must prove that harm was incurred by the direct result of the physicians actions.
A health care provider must understand many aspects of statutory duty. Duty is “a legal obligation imposed on one to conform to a recognized standard of care to safe guard the rights of others”. The standard of care is usually related to medical malpractice cases. Standard of care is defined as “the caution and prudence that a reasonable person would exercise under the circumstances or by appropriate authority for such situations”. This is mainly of importance because all physicians are expected to perform within the guidelines of this duty, and this standard or care changes depending on the circumstances. “Once the duty has been established, the plaintiff must show that it was breached by presenting evidence of the facts of the case and testimony from expert witnesses regarding whether the standard was met”(Showalter, 2014 p 139). Negligence results in the failure to meet this standard of care, and the jury usually decides if the defendant is guilty of committing a negligent act. Causation is an aspect of negligence. The defendant could be held liable for negligence if the act was considered to be foreseeable, and if the injury occurred from a breach of duty.
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
One of the problems with malpractice is that sometimes we have a hard time recognizing it. We may not know what exactly constitutes medical malpractice, or what qualifies as medical malpractice. Even worse, we often don't know what our course of action should
Negligence is the failure to do something. Many medical cases are filed as medical malpractice suits, “medical malpractice is professional misconduct. Malpractice differs from negligence because it is performed by a license medical professional” (Flight 2). The case of Horton V. Niagara Falls Memorial Medical Center can be used as a primary example where negligence, “failure to take reasonable precautions to protect others from the risk of harm” (Flight 33), is visible.
Negligence is when somebody has a duty of care and that duty is breached. Negligence is split into 3 parts.
When assessing whether a no fault regime is better than a negligence rule in dealing with the causes and consequences of medical error, it would seem prudent to first understand the meaning of the term “medical error”. Liang defines medical error as ‘a mistake, inadvertent occurrence, or unintended event in health-care delivery which may, or may not, result in patient injury’ (2000, p.542). The consequence of these errors (or adverse events) that lead to patient injury, and the method by which we determine and administer compensation for such injuries, has been the source of heated debate amongst scholars in recent
Negligence is carelessness amounting to the culpable breach of a duty, ie failure to do something that a reasonable person (ie an average
damages. In order to obtain a judgment of negligence against a doctor the patient has to be able
Medical malpractice differs from a standards negligence claim and some states have different definitions. There are two primary formulations for the legal standard of
Breach of Duty: if a doctor performs surgery on the wrong patient, they breached their duty by failing to protect the patient.
Negligence is when someone is failing to do something that a reasonable person would do in a similar situation or, doing something that a reasonable person did not do in a similar situation.
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)
Negligence happens when a “person’s actions fall below a certain level of care. Negligence can involve doing something carelessly or failing to do something that should have been done.” (Fremgen, 2009, p. 35). In order to prove negligence the plaintiff must present the following elements: 1) duty to care, 2) breach of duty to care, 3) injury and 4) causation (Pozgar, 2012, p. 33). Duty to care is the first element which deals with the care that the defendant (physician) owes the plaintiff (the patient).
In Gregg v Scott, Mr. Malcolm Gregg (‘the claimant’), the House of Lords examined the law of negligence in the area of personal injury. In order for the claimant to have a successful claim in court, the onus to shifts to the claimant to demonstrate that a duty of care owed by the doctor, there was a breach of that duty, an injury was sustained, and the negligence on behalf of the doctor Dr. Andrew Scott (‘defendant’) was a cause of the ‘injury’. If these elements are not satisfied, the claimant may lose its entitlement to full compensation.