Medical Malpractice and Tort Reform
Medical malpractice involves negligent care by a physician. The physician has either done or has not done something (neglect) to make a medical situation worse. A patient may come in with what seems to be something that isn’t serious, but it turns out to be worse because all that could have been done was not done. Medical malpractice in some states results in a cap in damages. The elements of this cause of action according to Zachary Matzo are “duty, breach, causation, and damages” (Matzo, 2015).
Elements of Medical Malpractice
In order to prevail in a medical malpractice claim the plaintiff must be able to prove duty, breach causation, and damage. Therefore, if a patient comes in with an injury the physician
Case Citation: Gallagher v. Cayuga Medical Center 151 AD 3d 1349 - NY: Appellate Div., 3rd Dept. 2017 Background: In this civil case Timothy W. Gallagher is the appellant, and Cayuga Medical Center (CMC) is the respondents. The case took place in the appellate division of the supreme court of New York, division three. The plaintiff’s complaint was that Cayuga Medical Center had asserted medical malpractice, negligence, wrongful death and emotional distressed.
“To prove the causation element, the injured plaintiff must show a direct relationship between the alleged misconduct and the injury sustained from the misconduct.” (Morissette, 2014) Tammy Cleveland can show a legally sufficient relationship between the breach of duty and the injury that is is referred to as proximate causation. But for the fact Dr. Perry refused to check the vitals of Michael Cleveland he misdiagnosed him, which in turn caused his death. Dr. Perry can also be charged with negligence per se for “failing to obey the statute and adhering the standard of care expected of him as a doctor”. (Dudzik, 2015) He neglected his patient and the pleas from his family, ultimately shortening his life.
It would have been helpful to have his signature on the consent. Physicians can get too relaxed with consents and risks and benefits and documentation in the medical record. It goes by unnoticed until a patient has a complication and the physician is unable to prove what they did. Or maybe sometimes, they really did not get informed consent. The plaintiff would have still have an injuries caused by the procedure, but would likely have been considered an unfortunate bad outcome, but not negligence.
In order to maintain a claim regarding medical malpractice, a plaintiff must show 1) a duty owed to the plaintiff by the defendant (inherent, voluntary, or statutory) 2) a breach of the duty by allowing the conduct to fall below the standard of care, and 3) a compensable injury proximately caused by the defendant’s breach of duty. Carey was able to establish an inherent duty was owed to him by Connelly but was not able to provide evidence to support his claim about the breach of duty by conduct or that his injury was caused solely by the conduct of
Medical professionals are liable for malpractice and could face consequences such as a lawsuit against them or being fired. These errors can be minimized by being more
When the doctor left the piece of metal in his leg, and then had removed it is proof that the doctor breached his legal duty. There is causation because doctor instead of making Cal feels less pain, does the complete opposite. Also he can sue Abe, for minor injuries to his head and for being the cause of the first accident. It was Abe duty, to safely transport Cal. Like Abe, was driving it
As Americans we are not subject to dictatorship; someone having complete authority over our lives. In fact, The United States of America gets praised for not being a communist country. The government does not control every aspect of society but Tort Reform challenges the idea of Americans free will and put a cap on the compensation that is legally and morally right for the sake of big business corporations. Tort Reform is the complete opposite of a taboo topic. Tort reform is such a controversial topic that is still talked about in the newspaper and other social media outlets even today.
In the case of Tomcik vs. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections, Janet Tomcik, the plaintiff, blamed the loss of her right breast on the fact that there was a major delay in her examination and treatment of her tumor. This could be known as nonfeasance negligence, which is the “failure to act when there is a duty to act,” (Pozgar, 2016). The corrections department, or in this case, the defendant, claimed that Tomcik`s cancer was already so developed, that her breast would have been removed regardless of when her official checkup and treatment took place. One stakeholder in this case is Janet Tomcik. She is the patient who not only lost her breast, but endured “physical pain, [and] emotional suffering,” (Tomcik, 1991).
The court found the “Defendant's care of Claimant fell below acceptable standards of practice” (Stashenko, 2015). In 2009 a former inmate of the Hawaii corrections department was awarded close to $1 million in damages for an incident in 2003, in which the physician’s failure to give the correct type and dosage of antibiotic for an infection in his scrotum. This resulted in 6 subsequent surgeries and the removal of his scrotum, rendering him
“Medical malpractice claims and lawsuits deal with Improper, unskilled, or negligent treatment of a patient by a physician, dentist, nurse, pharmacist, or other health care professional. Negligence is the predominant theory of liability concerning allegations of medical malpractice, making this type of litigation part of Tort Law. Since the 1970s, medical malpractice has been a controversial social issue. Physicians have complained about the large number of malpractice suits and have urged legal reforms to curb large damage awards, whereas tort attorneys have argued that negligence suits are an effective way of compensating victims of negligence and of policing the medical profession. A person who alleges negligent medical malpractice
It It f It frustrates me what Dr. Anna Pou had to go through with the lawsuits of the Memorial Medical Center incident. As Healthcare professionals, being sued for making the rightful decision for the patient and the hospital is unjust. Healthcare professionals like Dr. Pou, have taken the Hippocratic oath, and one of the promises made within that oath is “first, do no harm”. Hospital’s should not be so quick to make such an important decision of pressing charges to their faculty; more trust should be placed in them. In addition, she made it clear her intentions were just to ‘‘help’’ patients ‘‘through their pain,’’ on national television.
Negligence is the breach of a duty caused by the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided by those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do. Actionable negligence consists in the neglect of the use of ordinary care or skill towards a person to whom the defendant owes the duty of observing ordinary care and skill, by which neglect the plaintiff has suffered injury to his person or property. ELEMENTS OF NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS The definition involves three constituents of negligence: (1) A legal duty to exercise due care on the part of the party complained of towards the party complaining the former’s conduct within the scope
Health Care Law: Tort Case Study Carolann Stanek University of Mary Health Care Law: Tort Case Study A sample case study reviewed substandard care that was delivered to Ms. Gardner after having sustained an accident and brought to Bay Hospital for treatment. Dr. Dick, a second-year pediatric resident, was on that day in the ED and provided care for Ms. Gadner. Dr. Moon, is the chief of staff and oversees the credentialing of all physicians at Bay Hospital.
Negligence is when a nurse who is fully capable of caring does not care in the way a reasonably prudent nurse would, and as a result the
1. Introduction: Radiologists recently have been advanced because of radiology expanding practices in many sensitive medical cases. Recent charges against radiologists have brought new obligations and liabilities, making them vulnerable to higher degrees of legal cases against them. Negligence legal proceedings in radiology naturally appear as a result of failure to diagnosis or poor consultation and thus failure to react medically in a timely manner.