free
hit counter
Can You Sue A Doctor For Malpractice In Canada | Under What Circumstances Can You Sue A Doctor

It is usually the case that a visit to our doctor will be enough to receive the medical advice required to send us away on the road to recovery without any further intervention being required. However, on occasion, GPs act negligently which results in complications being suffered by the patient. This may lead to further treatment or surgery which would have been unnecessary but for the GP’s negligence.
These critics assert that these rate increases are causing doctors to go out of business or move to states with more favorable tort systems.[30] Not everyone agrees, though, that medical malpractice lawsuits are solely causing these rate increases.[31] A 2003 report from the General Accounting Office found multiple reasons for these rate increases, with medical malpractice lawsuits being the primary driver.[32] Despite noting multiple reasons for rate increases, the report goes on to state that the "GAO found that losses on medical malpractice claims-which make up the largest part of insurers’ costs-appear to be the primary driver of rate increases in the long run." More recent data has indicated that medical malpractice rates are generally no longer rising. In 2011, data pooled from the industry by the publication Medical Liability Monitor indicated that medical malpractice insurance rates had declined for four straight years. The decrease was seen in both states that had enacted tort reform and in states that had not, leading actuaries familiar with the data to suggest that patient safety and risk management campaigns had had a more significant effect.[33]
Im going through this right now, a dr. Did a 45 min eval on me at the request of dfs just to make sure i was "ok" an this woman said i was borderline psychotic and narcissistic. . she made up lies on the report to support her claim.. And i cant get a 2nd opinion because dfs only excepts reports from workers in their department... I dont know what to do. These people are the devil.

Although Canada is often characterized as a country that has “socialized” medicine, its system differs considerably from countries in which physicians are essentially employed by the state or the entire medical profession is under unified state control.  In Canada, most medical practitioners are in private practice just as they are in the United States.  Most physicians have their own offices, set their own schedules, and see patients who have chosen to come to them on a regular basis or for a particular condition.  Canadians are not assigned doctors by the government or an insurance plan.  They do have choices.[1] 
Obtain your medical records from the hospital or doctor's office. Patients have the right to access their medical records and to receive copies. Do this before you make any complaint so that you can make sure that the office does not attempt to cover anything up. Tell the office that you want the complete records, including any tests done, doctor's notes and anything else associated with your file.
There are a number of different ways that improper delay in the provision of medical care could result in harm to a patient -- the delay may have made your condition worse, it may have negated the possibility that certain treatment could be administered, it could have blunted the effectiveness of a certain treatment method, or it could have unnecessarily prolonged or intensified your pain and discomfort.
Doctor Mistake, Serious Injury – Despite significant harm to the patient, sometimes it is impossible to prove a case of medical malpractice against a physician.  For example, an older patient with a heart condition may die after receiving the wrong medication.  After an investigation, experts may determine that although the physician prescribed the wrong medication, the incorrectly prescribed drug had the intended effect on the patient.  In this case, there is physician negligence (for prescribing the incorrect medication), but no causation (the mistake did not cause the harm to the patient).
You must show that you had a physician-patient relationship with the doctor you are suing. Basically what this means is that you hired the doctor and the doctor agreed to be hired. So if you were harmed while following the advice of a doctor you overheard talking at a bar, you do not have a malpractice claim. 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.
Subsequent cases have held the Bivens theory of recovery applies to other claims under the various rights enumerated in the Constitution. (For decisions concerning redress of Fifth Amendment claims with Bivens actions, See Young v. Pierce, (DC Tex. 544 F.Supp. 1010) and Eight Amendment claims Mackey v. Indiana Hospital, (DC PA 562 F.Supp. 1251. [3]
Medical malpractice claims are incredibly complex cases, and the laws governing them vary from state to state. Even the most obvious malpractice claims will still require meeting numerous administrative, or claim filing, prerequisites, such as providing the doctor or hospital with notice, or even getting another doctor’s opinion. Some states even have shorter statute of limitations for malpractice claims.
If you are looking to move along with the process of making a claim and want to ascertain whether Been Let Down are the right medical negligence Solicitors for you, we welcome you to contact us today. This can be done by phoning our office on 0151 321 1000, or by visiting our website at www.beenletdown.co.uk to request a call-back for a more suitable time, or to complete our claims form. We will then arrange for an initial consultation with you, and determine how to best move forward with your case.
We decided to sue the other insurance company, and Jared was able to obtain the full limits of the policy. This covered a brand new pickup truck for myself, my medical bills, and then some pain and suffering compensation. If you have to go to trial, or if you have to be in front of a mitigator, he’s going to have a strong case for you and present it in a professional manner.

Im going through this right now, a dr. Did a 45 min eval on me at the request of dfs just to make sure i was "ok" an this woman said i was borderline psychotic and narcissistic. . she made up lies on the report to support her claim.. And i cant get a 2nd opinion because dfs only excepts reports from workers in their department... I dont know what to do. These people are the devil.


My son was diagnosed in his teens with ADHD Paranoid schizophrenia which he was prescribed rispiridone which stabilized his condition slightly but as an adult he couldn't tollorate the side affects any longer and his team (lol) changed it over 2 years ago, since then it's been a living hell. He has been in a psychotic state since and no one is helping him, he totally believes what he thinks is happening to him is real and he has no mental illness, teams (lol) have seen him periodically and he convinced them it is all real and walked away! Fuelling his beliefs although it has been proved by the police numerous times the GP blood tests and a&e visits that nothing is being put in his water supply food etc but yet he still TRUELY believes he's being targeted and drugged. I've tried and tried to tell his GP, rang the local mental health units and told them, rang his adolescent psychiatrist who was brilliant when he was a teen but did nothing as an adult as they are moving and he wouldn't work with them after the visit to his home to section him in which they left believing him, but to my son it is real he's delusional, psychotic, violent, demanding, they are ment to be professionals! I no longer live near my son due to health issues, spinal injuries, ms/me hemoplegic migraine amongst others, so my youngest son who lives 2 mins away from my eld
If you don’t file a medical malpractice claim or lawsuit against your doctor within the prescribed time period, absent some exceptional circumstances you will be barred from seeking monetary compensation for the injuries and damages you sustained. A medical malpractice lawyer should know the statute of limitations deadline in your jurisdiction and can work to make sure that a claim or lawsuit is filed in your case in a timely manner.
In response to rising malpractice suits, many states pushed for "tort reform" measures. Such measures limit the amount of damages a patient can recover for noneconomic losses, such as pain and suffering, and Punitive Damages. For example, in 1975, California enacted the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act, which limits recovery of noneconomic damages at $250,000 and restricts the amount of fees that may be recovered by lawyers. Several other states adopted similar measures based on the California model.
Many litigants facing civil lawsuits in which the United States is the plaintiff have erroneously sought to counterclaim against the U.S. The United States, however, to this date has not waived sovereign immunity for claims for damages, (See United States v. Northside Realty Associates, 324 F.Supp. 287, 291 (N.D. GA 1971) (dismissing a counterclaim asserted against the Attorney General where plaintiff in the suit was the United States on the ground that although the suit was initiated by the Attorney General, the real party in interest was the United States).

Under Article III, Section 2 of the United States Constitution, the Supreme Court of the United States has original jurisdiction over cases between states. Congress, if it so chooses, may grant lower federal courts concurrent jurisdiction over cases between states. However, Congress has not yet chosen to do so. Thus, the United States Supreme Court currently has original and exclusive jurisdiction over cases between state governments.


In an action against a surgeon for malpractice, the jury should be instructed that the plaintiff must show by a preponderance of the evidence and the jury must find that the defendant in the performance of his service either did some particular thing or things that physicians and surgeons of ordinary skill, care and diligence would not have done under the same or similar circumstances, or that the defendant failed or omitted to do some particular thing or things which physicians and surgeons of ordinary skill, care and diligence would have done under the same or similar circumstances.
The South Dakota surgeon had been called to vouch for the expertise of one of his partners whose patient had suffered a stroke and permanent disability after an operation. The problem was Aanning had, in his own mind, questioned his colleague’s skill. His partner’s patients had suffered injuries related to his procedures. But Aanning understood why his partner’s attorney had called him as a witness: Doctors don’t squeal on doctors.
A personal example - I had a physician try to talk me in to ECT several years ago. I explained that I didn't want to do it, because I didn't want to accept the risks of permanent memory loss. He denied those risks at first. He told me it was cooked up by the scientologists and anti-psychiatry folks and assumed my resistance was due to having seen the movie One Flew Over a Cuckoos Nest (which I had not seen, by the way). I finally got him to concede it was a risk, a risk I wasn't willing to take. I don't care how small the risk is or if the physician thinks it's worth it. They better tell me the truth. He wasn't the one having the procedure and accepting those risks. I was. As long as I am legally competent, the decision is mine. I have real issues about trying to coerce someone into signing an informed consent document by lying. That's unethical. I continue to be glad I didn't do it. It's a very individual decision.
Although the medical school adage of “treat the patient and not the test” has value, it’s also important for health-care providers to carefully assess the information provided by the tests that they order. I’ve witnessed many instances in which highly abnormal test results were either interpreted incorrectly or disregarded by physicians—sometimes with fatal consequences.

SOURCES: Michael Grodin, MD, professor and director of medical ethics, Boston University School of Public Health. John C. Nelson, MD, MPH, president, American Medical Association; obstetrician-gynecologist, Salt Lake City. New York State Department of Health. Composite State Board of Medical Examiners. National Cancer Institute. American Medical Association. Administrators in Medicine, National Organization for State Medical & Osteopathic Board Executive Directors. American Board of Medical Specialties. Public Citizen.


Regardless of how much you want to be the one selected to do the procedure, that's the patient's choice not yours. I think it's smart to look into a physician's background before selecting them to do surgery. I would want to know how much experience you have or if there had been malpractice issues. Patients are the ones paying and taking the risks. They get to decide how much risk they're willing to take -not the physician. If you refuse to answer the questions, which I do believe is your right, then it lets the patient decide what to do next - either get on the medical board website and see if anything has been reported, talk to more people, find another physician who doesn't mind answering the questions, etc.
While some medical errors are readily apparent, many times a serious hospital error is not immediately obvious. You may have a suspicion that you or your loved one has been harmed by a hospital’s substandard care. In most instances, you will need to have your medical records reviewed by independent medical experts to determine whether a preventable hospital error occurred.
Although this may sound like “tough love”, if you feel that you need or want to bring suit against your doctor because he or she injured you or a loved one, and your family or friends are giving your grief about it, maybe it’s time to think about whether they really have your best interests at heart. If bringing suit is something you feel that you need to do to pay for lost wages, medical bills, pain and suffering, or just to regain some sense of control over the situation, your good friends and family will eventually come to understand and stick by your side.
×