If the act that harmed you was committed by a contractor, the Federal Tort Claims Act generally does not kick in, unless the contractor was being closely supervised at the time by the VA itself, in a relationship more common in employer-employee settings. You cannot go after the government for damages, unless the government was in close supervision of the day-to-day activities, say, of a physician in private practice contracted with the VA.
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.
There is only a limited time during which a medical malpractice lawsuit can be filed. In the United States, these time limits are set by statute. In civil law systems, similar provisions are usually part of the civil code or criminal code and are often known collectively as "periods of prescription" or "prescriptive periods." The length of the time period and when that period begins vary per jurisdiction and type of malpractice. Therefore, each state has different time limits set.[18] For example, in Pennsylvania, there is a two-year statute of limitation,[20] but in other states the limitations period may be longer. Most states have special provisions for minors that may potentially extend the statute of limitations for a minor who has been injured as the result of medical malpractice.[21]
Doctor Mistake, Injury is Minor – This category encompasses situations in which a doctor misdiagnoses an injury (perhaps an ankle sprain) and then quickly corrects the misdiagnosis.  Like the no-injury scenario described above, the patient would not have a case for medical malpractice against the doctor.  Because the doctor quickly corrected the mistake, the patient suffered no damage.

A patient who did not have his or her wounds dressed or treated properly and later develops an infection may decide to sue. If an anesthesiologist or other employee gives the patient a drug that he or she should have known would cause issues, the patient may pursue a medical malpractice claim. A common cause for a medical malpractice claim is when the patient was misdiagnosed or had a delayed diagnosis due to a mistake.

If a plaintiff can demonstrate that the government's action was done in bad faith, the plaintiff can receive damages despite sovereign immunity. Typically if a party can demonstrate that the government intentionally acted wrongly with the sole purpose of causing damages, that party can recover for injury or economic losses. For example, if access lanes to a major bridge are closed for repair and the closure results in severe traffic congestion, the action was in good faith and the state could not be sued. However, if, as in the Fort Lee lane closure scandal, the lanes were closed in retaliation against a mayor who declined to support a politician's campaign, with the explicit purpose of causing traffic jams, such lawsuits could proceed.[27]
No matter the value of your estate, it is essential that you plan for what will happen to your assets after your death. A living trust, when done correctly, can assure a faster distribution of your assets, avoid unnecessary taxes and keep your wishes private as well. But, it must be done right. Here are five things you must do before writing a living trust.
Doctor Mistake, Injury is Minor – This category encompasses situations in which a doctor misdiagnoses an injury (perhaps an ankle sprain) and then quickly corrects the misdiagnosis.  Like the no-injury scenario described above, the patient would not have a case for medical malpractice against the doctor.  Because the doctor quickly corrected the mistake, the patient suffered no damage.

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 defendant deviated from that standard.
As can be seen from the above, the Canadian system is more accurately described as a “single-payer” system than a “socialized” one.  However, even this description needs to be qualified.  Canadian physicians are not required to submit bills for their fees to the provincial health insurance plans.  They can “opt out” of the systems and bill their patients directly.  However, physicians who do decline to participate in a provincial plan must operate entirely outside it as they are generally prohibited from billing the insurance plan for some of their services and patients for others.  In other words, physicians cannot be partial participants.  For this reason, the vast majority of Canada’s physicians are enrolled in the provincial health insurance plans and earn virtually all of their income from the bills they submit to them.
As a nurse and a patient (of medical and psychiatric docs) I think that if a doc lies when obtaining informed consent, that is clearly NOT ok - not sure if that is malpractice and/or a licensure issue. I think asking about complications rates and experience with a particular procedure are absolutely appropriate questions, for any MD. When you read articles for consumers about how to get good care, these are questions you are encouraged to ask!!! If the doc has had little experience and/or complications, doc can have prepared a statement explaining why he feels adequately prepared in this case, what is different about this case in terms of risk of complications(such as 'other pt. had another serious illness that increased risk, etc.)
^ Department of Revenue v. Kuhnlein, 646 So.2d 717, 721 (Florida Supreme Court 1994) ("The State next argues that the cause below was barred by the state's sovereign immunity, by an alleged common law rule that no one is entitled to the refund of an illegal tax, and by the requirements of Florida's refund statutes. Even if true, these are not proper reasons to bar a claim based on constitutional concerns. Sovereign immunity does not exempt the State from a challenge based on violation of the federal or state constitutions, because any other rule self-evidently would make constitutional law subservient to the State's will. Moreover, neither the common law nor a state statute can supersede a provision of the federal or state constitutions.").
Canadian physicians who are in private practice or work for hospitals are required to obtain medical liability insurance.  Such insurance is available through the Canadian Medical Protective Association (CMPA).  Insurance premiums or “membership fees” are based upon the type of work a physician performs and the region in which he or she practices.  The three fee regions are Quebec, Ontario, and the Rest of Canada.  The CMPA has published Fee Schedules.[6]  Fees are not based upon a physician’s record and are not increased for a history of complaints or on account of claims paid.
The Seattle medical malpractice lawyers at The Tinker Law Firm, PLLC can help if you have reason to believe that you or a loved one was harmed by a negligent breakdown in the communication of medical test results. Our attorneys have recovered millions of dollars on behalf of those injured by negligent medical care. For a free review of your case, complete our online contact form.
Not true! There are thousands of physicians sued successfully every year without ending in the loss of their licenses or practices. Although your doctor will have to spend some time defending the suit, throughout the process he will most likely still be able to see his patients and conduct his life as normal. Furthermore, after the conclusion of the suit, he will most likely go back to treating his patients – albeit, hopefully, more carefully this time.
In C & L Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizen Band, Potawatomi Indian Tribe of Oklahoma, 532 U.S. 411 (2001), the Supreme Court of the United States held that sovereigns are not immune under the Federal Arbitration Act. Since arbitration is a matter of contract between the parties, agreeing to participate in arbitration constitutes consent to be subject to the arbitrator's jurisdiction, thus constituting a voluntary waiver of immunity.[24]
The 18th and 19th centuries saw an ebb and flow between patients and physicians respective rights in the area of medical liability, alternating who held the upper hand. One of the first courses of action was defining the emerging concept of ‘standard' or 'duty of care.' Both standard of care and the logical foundation of ‘expert testimony' are derived from the notion that there is a professional custom. This means the standard of care a physician owes the patient is not necessarily defined by a common rationale or legal sensibility, but by what other physicians deem “customary” for their profession. Therefore, other medical professionals must agree that a defendant professional “contravened customary practice” in order to constitute legal transgression. This allowed medical professionals to set the legal standard for their own behavior. They were bound to a standard of care because they practiced a 'common calling' and possessed a supposed shared knowledge of best practices. In early British common law, this principle was contained in the 'rule of locality,' which held that physicians were bound to their self-set standard, but only by those professionals within their geographic region, or "locality." This has evolved, where modern law does not esteem geographic locality but requires that all medical professionals in the same practice area be bound to the same standard. Only a physician in the same practice area may judge that another professional has breached the standard of care in that profession. A 1769 lawsuit in England, Slater v. Baker set about defining the standard by which a physician's conduct could be measured and compared, while still enforcing the arbitrary requirement that a physician may only be found liable if a fellow physician from the defendant's same geographic region found that the standard of care was breached. The locality rule with regards to geography was eventually scrapped in Anglo-American law, but the locality of practice area remained intact.
Usually these cases are handled as civil matters, because the doctor lacked the requisite intent or did not act in a completely wanton and reckless manner. Additionally, the doctor may face disciplinary proceedings against his or her license, and could be fire by any institution for which he or she works. This could result in an enormous judgment against the doctor, loss of a professional license, and unemployment. The loss of a patient is not likely to be handled lightly, even though it may only result in civil penalties.
Most doctors and other medical professionals carry malpractice insurance to protect themselves in case of negligence/unintentional injury to their patients. The insurance may even be a requirement for employment within a specific medical group or hospital system. Some states, but not all, have minimum insurance requirements for medical providers. Malpractice insurance will cover both attorney costs and any money given to the plaintiff as the result of a settlement or verdict until it is exhausted, and then the medical provider or facility may be responsible for any excess verdict or judgment against them.
Although the laws of medical malpractice differ significantly between nations, as a broad general rule liability follows when a health care practitioner does not show a fair, reasonable and competent degree of skill when providing medical care to a patient.[2] If a practitioner holds himself out as a specialist a higher degree of skill is required.[2] Jurisdictions have also been increasingly receptive to claims based on informed consent, raised by patients who allege that they were not adequately informed of the risks of medical procedures before agreeing to treatment.[2]
In the United States, the federal government has sovereign immunity and may not be sued unless it has waived its immunity or consented to suit.[7] The United States as a sovereign is immune from suit unless it unequivocally consents to being sued.[8] The United States Supreme Court in Price v. United States observed: "It is an axiom of our jurisprudence. The government is not liable to suit unless it consents thereto, and its liability in suit cannot be extended beyond the plain language of the statute authorizing it."[9]

For example, John Smith went to his local doctor because he had a black spot on his foot and his leg was painful.  His doctor sent him to a surgeon who suggested a special procedure using a needle inserted into his leg artery to see whether the veins in John’s foot were blocked.  The surgeon botched the procedure and John’s artery was damaged.  Several weeks later John’s leg had to be amputated.  When John consulted a lawyer and the lawyer investigated his claim, the lawyer found that John’s original foot condition was gangrene and he was always going to have to have his leg amputated, so the surgeon’s negligence in performing the procedure did not leave John worse off than he would otherwise have been and he fails the test of causation.
A large number of medical malpractice lawsuits stem from the misdiagnosis or delayed diagnosis of a medical condition, illness, or injury. When a doctor's diagnosis error leads to incorrect treatment, delayed treatment, or no treatment at all, a patient's condition can be made much worse, and they may even die. That being said, a mistake in diagnosis by itself is not enough to sustain a medical malpractice lawsuit.
dear carol i know its not much to offer in this situation but i can give you infromation that might help your son first of all have you consired he is having side effcets to the new medication make sure you geg name of it also i suggest you had to pandasnetwork. org it not what you think it talk about an autoimmune condtion that cause many syptoms like you say also if are heading to a solictor maybe talk your son into getting a chromosome test if possible because if they belive adhd is caused by improper chromosome numbers they should of least told you about it hang in there its such a shame what those pschyrtist do they like vlutrues they prey on weak till they dead,thats an offense to vlutures least the ARE HONEST hope info help
There are any number of scenarios under which a physician can be negligent. Keep in mind that in the examples above -- and in every other case -- it is incumbent upon you to prove that your physician breached his duty to practice according to the standard of care, and that breach caused you harm. See What You Need to Prove to learn about the key legal pieces you and your attorney would need to put together.
The medical standard of care can be thought of as a playbook that outlines patient treatment under various medical situations. Medical professionals must adhere to mandatory requirements to ensure the safety of their patients. When doctors are granted a medical license, they take the Hippocratic Oath, which is basically a promise to treat their patients, to the best of their ability, to avoid causing them harm. When a doctor or other medical professional breaks this oath, they are considered negligent in legal terms. When a court is attempting to determine if a medical professional acted negligently, they will compare their performance to the accepted medical standard of care.

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.
Roman law spread throughout continental Europe around 1200 AD, and many countries’ current laws regarding personal injury and medical malpractice derive from Roman origin. English common law was greatly influenced by the Romans, and in turn 19th century English common law had a substantial influence on the American legal system. During the reign of Charles V, a law took form that required medical professionals’ opinions to be taken into account in cases of violent deaths. This served as a precursor to the presence of expert testimony in medical malpractice cases in order to establish standard of care (for more information on standard of care, see “Medical Malpractice in the U.S.”)
A misdiagnosis or delayed diagnosis itself is not evidence of negligence. Skillful doctors can and do make diagnostic errors even when using reasonable care. The key is determining whether the doctor acted competently, which involves an evaluation of what the doctor did and did not do in arriving at a diagnosis. This means looking at the "differential diagnosis" method the doctor used in making treatment determinations.
You do have recourse, but as I've already told you, that recourse is through the insurance carrier. You have a contract with the insurance carrier. The doctor has a contract with the insurance carrier. You do not have a contract with the doctor. Therefore, it is up to the insurance carrier to enforce the contract. You can't sue the doctor because your contract is not with the doctor.
This is probably the number one reason why you don’t want to sue your doctor. While it is true that most lawsuits can take some time to become resolved, it is well worth the wait. However, there are ways to speed up the process: file your lawsuit as soon as it is determined that the case has merit and make sure that the court imposes deadlines for every step of the lawsuit, such as specific dates for depositions, defense medical examinations, and the exchange of discovery responses. This will prevent the lawsuit from the inevitable delays presented by defense attorneys and their insurers and keep the case on the proverbial “fast track” to trial.
×