www.

eastzonemedic
o.com
www.eastzonemedico
.in
Helpline no

MEDICAL MALPRACTICE
Medical malpractice is a special kind of personal injury case
that is brought against hospitals, nurses, doctors, EMTs, or
other medical care professionals. It is a form of professional
malpractice (just like attorney malpractice is a form of
professional malpractice against lawyers) that applies only
when an individual is injured in the course of receiving some
type of medical treatment or medical care. Those who suffer
from a medical malpractice injury may be able to hold the
medical care provider(s) responsible for that injury liable under
the special rules that apply for this type of professional
negligence. Medical malpractice occurs when a patient is
harmed by a doctor (or other medical professional) who fails to
competently perform his or her medical duties. Medical
malpractice law provides a way for patients to recover
compensation from any harms resulting from sub-standard
treatment. In the majority of cases, the medical malpractice or
negligence involved a medical error, possibly in diagnosis,
medication dosage, health management, treatment or
aftercare. The error may have been because nothing was done
(an act of omission), or a negligent act. We go to doctors and
medical professionals for accurate diagnoses, quality care, and,
hopefully, to feel better. However, it doesn't always work out

Types of Medical Malpractice

Failure to diagnose. If a competent doctor would have

discovered the patient's illness or made a different diagnosis,
which in turn would have led to a better outcome than the one
actually achieved, then the patient may have a viable medical
malpractice claim.
Improper treatment. If a doctor treats the patient in a way that
no other competent doctor would, the patient could have a
medical malpractice claim. In a similar vein, it may also be
malpractice if the doctor selects the appropriate treatment but
administers it incompetently.
Failure to warn a patient of known risks. Doctors have a duty to
warn patients of known risks of a procedure or course of
treatment -- this is known as the duty of informed consent. If a
patient, once properly informed of possible risks, would have
elected not to go through with the procedure, the doctor may
be liable for medical malpractice if the patient is injured by the
procedure (in a way that the doctor should have warned could
happen). (To learn more, read Nolo's article Medical

Requirements in Medical
Malpractice Cases
Medical malpractice cases must be brought soon after the
injury. In most states, you must bring a medical malpractice
claim fairly quickly -- often between six months and two years,
depending on the state. (The time period in which you must bring
the lawsuit is called the "statute of limitations.") If you don't file
the lawsuit within the specified period of time, the court will
dismiss the case regardless of the facts.
When the time period starts ticking also depends on the state. In
some states, the clock starts when the negligent act occurred; in
others, it starts when the patient should have discovered the
injury.
Special medical malpractice review panels. Many states
require the patient to first submit the claim to a malpractice
review panel. This panel of experts will hear arguments, review
evidence and expert testimony, and then decide whether
malpractice has occurred. The panel decision does not replace an
actual medical malpractice lawsuit, and the panel cannot award
damages, but it's a hoop the patient must jump through before

Special notice requirements. Some states

require that the patient give the doctor
notice of the malpractice claim, in the form
of a basic description, before filing
anything.
Expert testimony is required. Expert
opinions are often a crucial feature of the
patient's case. A qualified expert is usually
required at trial. (And often, expert
testimony or an expert affidavit is required
at the malpractice review panel proceedings
prior to commencing trial.) State rules vary
as to what makes somebody qualified to
provide expert medical testimony, but
generally it is someone with experience in
the particular field at issue. In a very
limited number of circumstances, expert
testimony is not required, such as when a

Requirements for a Claim

A doctor-patient relationship existed. You must show that you
had a physician-patient relationship with the doctor you are suing
-- this means you hired the doctor and the doctor agreed to be
hired. For example, you can't sue a doctor you overheard giving
advice at a cocktail party. If a doctor began seeing you and
treating you, it is easy to prove a physician-patient relationship
existed. Questions of whether or not the relationship exists most
frequently arise where a consulting physician did not treat you
directly.
The doctor was negligent. Just because you are unhappy with
your treatment or results does not mean the doctor is liable for
medical malpractice. The doctor must have been negligent in
connection with your diagnosis or treatment. 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. The doctor's care is not required
to be the best possible, but simply "reasonably skillful and
careful." Whether the doctor was reasonably skillful and careful is
often at the heart of a medical malpractice claim. Almost all
states require that the patient present a medical expert to discuss
the appropriate medical standard of care and show how the

The doctor's negligence caused the injury.

Because many malpractice cases involve
patients that were already sick or injured,
there is often a question of whether what the
doctor did, negligent or not, actually caused
the harm. For example, if a patient dies after
treatment for lung cancer, and the doctor did
do something negligent, it could be hard to
prove that the doctor's negligence caused the
death rather than the cancer. The patient
must show that it is "more likely than not"
that the doctor's incompetence directly
caused the injury. Usually, the patient must
have a medical expert testify that the
doctor's negligence caused the injury.
The injury led to specific damages. Even if it
is clear that the doctor performed below the
expected standards in his or her field, the

Challenges in a Medical Malpractice

Proving the Doctor's Negligence
Proving negligence in a medical malpractice case is difficult. The
plaintiffs lawyer is often stuck with nothing more to rely upon than the
doctors own notes, which may very well be cryptic and self-serving.
The lawyer needs to work with his/her medical experts to find out what
the doctor actually did and what the doctor should have done. Very
few doctors are going to acknowledge that they made a mistake.
Medical textbooks may list multiple ways for treating a specific injury,
illness, or disease. The lawyer often has to be quite creative in order to
tease out the doctor's (or hospital's) negligence.
Convincing the Jury That the Doctor Was Negligent
Juries nationwide are tough on medical malpractice plaintiffs. Doctors
win the vast majority of medical malpractice cases that go to trial.
Lawyers and legal experts differ on why this is so, but one important
reason seems to be that juries understand that medicine is hard, that
there is often no one right way to do something, that most doctors try
their best, and that not all patients have a good outcome. Basically,
unless the doctor made an obvious mistake, like leaving an instrument
inside the patient, juries often give the doctor the benefit of the doubt.
That being said, malpractice happens. If you believe that you were the
victim of medical malpractice, you should contact a qualified medical

Finding a Qualified Medical Malpractice Lawyer

Finding a qualified lawyer is critical in a medical
malpractice case, much more so than in a standard
personal injury case. Medical malpractice is a
specialized area that not many lawyers have expertise
in. If you have a medical malpractice case, you need to
find a lawyer that actually specializes in it. The lawyer
does not have to do solely medical malpractice, but a
significant percentage of his/her caseload should be
medical malpractice.
There are several reasons for wanting a lawyer who
specializes in medical malpractice.
Complicated Medical Evidence
First, medical malpractice involves tricky medical
issues. You want a lawyer who is more accustomed to
dealing with complex medical evidence, compare with
the average personal injury lawyer.
Insurance Company Pressure
Second, the insurance companies will not respect a
plaintiffs lawyer who does not specialize in medical
malpractice when it comes time to talk settlement.

Necessity of Medical Experts

Third,medical malpractice casesalmost always
require a medical expert or a team of medical
experts to prove liability. Most doctors refuse to get
involved with medical malpractice cases because
they do not want to testify against a fellow doctor.
An experienced medical malpractice lawyer has a
team of qualified doctors on his/her Rolodex, while
an inexperienced lawyer will struggle to find a
qualified and willing medical expert.
High Cost of Litigation
Finally, medical malpractice cases are expensive,
primarily because of the cost of the medical
experts. Experienced lawyers know this and are
prepared to bear the costs, which could reach tens
of thousands of dollars. Novice medical malpractice
lawyers may not be able to afford the costs, and

When Do Birth Injuries Lead to Legal Action?

In every medical malpractice case, its first necessary to
establish the appropriate level of care under the
circumstances - the degree of care and skill of the average
health care provider who practices the same specialty, taking
into account the medical knowledge that is available to the
physician in that particular situation. This is a legal concept
known as the Medical Standard of Care. In some traumatic
childbirth scenarios, fast action is required on the part of the
doctor and especially in cases where the health of the
newborn or the mother is in danger. A birth injury may be
considered a practical (or even necessary) risk, if the
circumstances of the situation call for drastic measures. But
obviously, in cases where no complications exist and labor is
proceeding normally, a doctor may well be deemed negligent
if the baby ends up with a serious physical injury.
Alternatively, if a quick response to a dangerous situation is
necessary, and the doctor fails to act, that may also be
considered medical negligence, and the medical professional

Birth Injuries Resulting in Fetal Death

A childbirth injury that results in fetal death may give
rise to a medical malpractice claim if the treating
physician failed to provide the level of a care of a
reasonably skilled and knowledgeable healthcare
professional under the circumstances.
These cases are usually filed as wrongful death cases.
In some states, a wrongful death action can only be
brought where the baby died during or soon after the
birth. A fetus that dies in utero is often not considered
separate from the mother, although this is obviously a
complex question that will depend on the unique
circumstances of each case, not to mention state law.
This issue typically arises in one of two ways: (1) the
fetus dies before or during childbirth because the
mother also lost her life, or (2) the mother survives but
the fetus sustains injuries which lead to its death either
in utero or at the time of delivery. In these situations,
the question arises whether there is a distinct claim for
the wrongful death of the fetus -- separate from any

Common Causes for Medical Malpractice

Inpatients
For inpatients, the most common causes for medical malpractice
claims are surgical errors. Those make up about 1/3 of all medical
malpractice cases brought by inpatients. Surgical errors can range
from the strange (leaving surgical instruments inside the body) to the
horrific (amputation of the wrong limb). The most common types of
surgical errors are surgery performed on the wrong site, surgery
performed on the wrong patient, use of unsanitary surgical tools,
organ damage, and nerve damage. The first three are generally
considered to be preventable errors, while the second two may reflect
either an unfortunate medical outcome or some wrongdoing on the
part of the surgeon.
Inpatients may also suffer injuries due to problems with anesthesia. In
many cases, these types of errors are more dangerous than surgical
errors. Anesthesia can interact with the body in unexpected ways and
anesthesiologists must pay careful attention to a patients medical
history and constantly monitor patients while theyre under
anesthesia. In addition, some of the procedures required for surgery
under anesthesia can cause harm if theyre improperly performed. For
example, a patients trachea may be damaged by an improperly

Outpatients
For outpatients, by far the most common cause of
medical malpractice claims is misdiagnosis or failure to
diagnose. In adults, the most common errors of this
type relate to the diagnosis of cancer and heart
attacks. For children, the most common errors relate to
the diagnosis of meningitis. In some cases, diagnosis of
these conditions is difficult. They may share symptoms
with other common ailments, for example.
Unfortunately, failure to diagnose cancer, a heart
attack, meningitis, pneumonia, and other serious
conditions can be life-threatening.
Childbirth
Another common cause for medical malpractice suits is
errors relating to childbirth. About 20% of medical
malpractice cases are filed against OBGYNs more than
against any other type of doctor. Childbirth-related
suits are particularly difficult. Doctor errors can cause
serious health problems for newborns, but many health
problems are unrelated to the doctors actions.
There are three types of childbirth-related medical
malpractice claims: injuries to the child or mother,