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.
^ United States v. Williams, 514 U.S. 527 (1995). However, in the case of a wrongful levy (rather than an action to remove a tax lien), the Supreme Court held in 2007 that the injured party's remedy would be limited to Internal Revenue Code section 7426(a)(1), and not in section 1346(a)(1) of title 28. See EC Term of Years Trust v. United States, 550 U.S. 429 (2007).
In states using this second standard, courts ask whether a normal patient, with the same medical history and conditions as the plaintiff, would have changed his or her mind about the treatment if the risk was disclosed. Unlike states following the first standard, a doctor must also inform a patient of realistic alternative treatments, even if the doctor only recommends one treatment.
The report by the Indiana Department of Health identified 21 surgeries on the wrong body parts and 4 wrong surgical procedures performed on patients in 2014. The problem is common enough that the federal Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations published a protocol for healthcare providers to follow that includes a “timeout process” to prevent wrong operations and wrong-site surgery. Unfortunately, a fifth of our hospitals have not adopted the protocol.
Bivens actions, again, are by no means an exclusive remedy for redressing abuses of authority by federal government employees, even in a political context. In the celebrated case of Socialist Workers Party v. Attorney General, 596 F.2d. 58 (1979), 444 U.S. 903 (1979) (cert. denied) one of the many claims of the plaintiff, a Trotskyite communist organization, was for 193 surreptitious entries or burglaries committed by the F.B.I. Another set of claims was for the use of disruptive informants in the organization, which successfully proved itself to be a non-violent, educational group more involved in promoting and discussing ideas rather than in any violent act.
I have the same expectations of psych MDs, by the way. the issues may be harder to define, but certainly how much experience in treating a particular area, licensure, malpractice, etc. are legitimate questions. I don't have to know the doc's personal experiences of medical/MH/life issues to determine skills, but a doc should be able to give a carefully reasoned explanation of own skills/limitations. With psychiatry, I always thought it was incumbent upon the doc to have self knowledge sufficient to identify and appropriately refer clients who he/she cannot treat - ie, if you are in the midst of your own messy divorce, don't take on new clients with marital issues, etc. Yes, life is not always this neat and tidy, but isn't that why psych MDs have their own clinical supervision??
The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. If we do not win, you will not be responsible for attorney's fees, court costs, or litigation expenses. If you do win, these expenses and unpaid medical bills will be taken from your share of the recovery.
Medical malpractice litigation has evolved dramatically since the Code of Hammurabi was written. Certain fundamental principles – namely, the responsibility of medical professionals to prevent unnecessary injury and death – remain unchanged. However, the legal landscape is constantly shifting. Major controversy surrounds how to best improve medical malpractice law and hospital culture so that medical professionals can truly focus on providing the best care to their patients. This was the idea behind many tort reform measures, but it remains unclear whether these changes actually improved patient care, or just stopped patients from obtaining the compensation they needed and were entitled to. ADR may be a win-win solution for patients and medical professionals, increasing case efficiency and decreasing animosity between opposing parties.
In some situations, a patient may not receive important communications due to clerical errors. In these situations, if treatment of a treatable medical condition is delayed, or made impossible because of the delay, that failure to communicate can form the basis for malpractice liability. In fact, this sort of claim is among the fastest-growing type of medical malpractice, with a quarter of all failure to diagnose claims stemming from failure to communicate claims.
We offer a completely free, no obligation Medical Negligence Claim Assessment. We understand that suing your GP may not be an easy decision so we are here to help and advise you. We will take the time to listen to your complaint, and then explain whether you can sue a doctor, how long it might take, how you can fund the claim and how much compensation you might receive.
The biggest hurdle for patients to get over in bringing a claim is a law that sets up a defence for all professionals accused of negligence. It says that if the professional acted in a way that was widely accepted in Australia by that professional’s peers as competent professional practice then the professional is not liable. Note that ‘widely accepted’ does not necessarily mean that the majority of professionals have to agree to the practice.
^ C & L Enters., Inc. v. Citizen Band, Potawatomi Indian Tribe of Okla., 532 U.S. 411 (2001); Kiowa Tribe of Okla. v. Mfg. Techs., Inc., 523 U.S. 751 (1998); Okla. Tax Comm'n v. Citizen Band, Potawatomi Indian Tribe of Okla., 498 U.S. 505 (1991); Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, 436 U.S. 49 (1978); Puyallup Tribe, Inc. v. Dep't of Game of State of Wash., 433 U.S. 165 (1977); United States v. U.S. Fidelity & Guar. Co., 309 U.S. 506 (1940); Turner v. United States, 248 U.S. 354 (1919). See also Oneida Indian Nation of N.Y. v. Madison Cnty., 605 F.3d 149, 156 (2d Cir. 2010), cert. granted, 131 S. Ct. 459, vacated and remanded, 131 S. Ct. 704 (2011) (per curiam).
Medical malpractice lawsuits, like all civil cases, can only be brought within a certain period of time. That deadline is set by a law known called a “statute of limitations.” Every state has passed these kinds of laws, with different deadlines according to the kind of case you want to file. In almost every state, there is a dedicated statute of limitations that applies to medical malpractice cases.
I complained to my doctor at 18yoabout symptoms that should alert to endometriosis . I began my menstrual cycle at 11yo and it only kept getting worse because of the scar tissue build up . I was privately insured and he failed to refer me to an Ob - Gyn . He only prescribed ibuprofen and did nothing else . I am 22yo today and have just discovered I have endometriosis that has been scarring my uterus for years now and the doctor recommended a laproscopy procedure to remove all the scar tissue and endo cells outside my uterus to stop the spread that can result in infertility . I have believed the pain I was feelings was normal because my doctor dismissed my complaints . Had he referred me the growth of en do would have not been this advanced . There is 50% chance I cannot have children ! !
If you think you’ve been a victim of medical negligence at a hospital, you should speak to a lawyer as soon as possible. The statute of limitations, or the legal timeframe in which one can bring a medical negligence suit, begins once the injury is known or should have been known. The Florida statute of limitations for medical malpractice claims is generally 2 years-absent some exceptions that can extend the period up to 4 years or 8 years for infants.
The fact-finder will render a verdict for the prevailing party. If the plaintiff prevails, the fact-finder will assess damages within the parameters of the judge's instructions. The verdict is then reduced to the judgment of the court. The losing party may move for a new trial. In a few jurisdictions, a plaintiff who is dissatisfied by a small judgment may move for additur. In most jurisdictions, a defendant who is dissatisfied with a large judgment may move for remittitur. Either side may take an appeal from the judgment.
My problem now is I feel like a shell of who I was, a very successful sale manager earning 6 figures+ to now, not being able to hold a job and being on disability. I can't remember things or conversations that I have had. I can't be in places where there are too many people, forget a mall or a nice restaurant. My wife and daughter have affectionately resorted to nicknaming me "turtle" because I can't keep up. I just roll with it but it really hurts knowing I was once the sole provider of a very nice lifestyle for my family to becoming this exhausted, tired, uninterested person. I speak with no one, I have not 1 friend and for the most part, never leave the house. My brain feels scrambled all the time, foggy.
It’s important to note that even though you may have a medical malpractice action against the IME doctor if he or she is negligent, such an action is limited in scope. The IME doctor has no duty to diagnose or treat you, so you cannot bring a successful medical malpractice claim based on those theories. If the IME doctor harms you during the examination, however, you may have a claim.
Once a doctor initiates treatment of a patient, the doctor must not only terminate care at a proper time, but also in a proper manner. If a doctor transfers a patient to the care of a second doctor, the second doctor may not be familiar with crucial details of a patient's care. So, the first doctor has an ongoing obligation to provide the second doctor with proper instructions and all relevant records (treatment notes, test results, etc.). Failure to do so could rise to the level of medical malpractice.
After experiencing negligent medical care from a trusted physician or hospital, it can be difficult choosing an attorney from a sea of unknown names. The law firm you choose may be the most important decision you ever make about your case. Ask each attorney you are considering how many medical malpractice cases they have actually tried. Then ask yourself, for the same fee, wouldn’t you rather have the experience and expertise of The O’Keefe Firm to represent you?
I'm on my 4th Psychiatrist in the same practice over the past several years. I've been diagnosed with severe anxiety, manic depression, Bipolar and even ADHD. I also see a therapist in the same office who actually happens to be a Dr., 2 of the Psychiatrists were not actual MD's. they were associates. The therapist is the reason I keep going back though, he is helpful and doesn't always agree with the medications I've been prescribed. They even had me go through 6 1/2 weeks of TMS treatment, 45 minutes a day 5 days a week.
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.
If you are considering medical tourism, discuss the possible risks with your American general practitioner and, if possible, a local attorney. If you have already undertaken to receive treatment from a foreign doctor, and have suffered an injury, you should discuss the particular details of your case with a qualified, experienced attorney. You will need to find an attorney that has experience not just with medical malpractice, but also with international legal disputes. Before undertaking any legal action against a foreign doctor, you should ask your attorney whether your claim will be worth the trouble of fighting an international legal battle. You may find that you do not have the same entitlements that you would when bringing a claim against an American doctor, and this might make a victory a hollow exercise and a waste of time and money.
A steady uptick in medical malpractice cases can be attributed, in part at least, to the decline of religious fatalism. It was a pervasive belief that misfortune and injury were acts of God, meant to be construed as punishment for moral and religious transgressions. Overturning this belief may be considered a far-off ripple effect of The Enlightenment, a historical ‘moment' at which prominent European thinkers began to reject the notion that everything was determined by the will of an omnipotent God. As philosophers and scientists alike began to promulgate the idea that willful human action was the true determinant of fortune and misfortune, a fringe effect was the rise of medical malpractice litigation, a century or so later. As people began to accept that injury and misfortune could be attributed to human error and not God's will, they began to assert an entitlement to recompense if they suffered as a result of human error. This was a brick in the foundation of medical malpractice litigation.
In addition to notifying a health care provider that you intend to file a lawsuit, prior to filing suit in most jurisdictions, the injured patient must usually submit an affidavit or certificate from a qualified expert. This affidavit or certificate is usually completed by another doctor who can testify that there are reasonable grounds to determine that medical negligence or medical malpractice took place in a given case. Again, the exact requirements of the certificate vary from state to state and across jurisdictions.
Being unhappy with your treatment or the results of that treatment does not mean the doctor is liable or guilty of 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 would not have if they were treating you under the same circumstances. The doctor’s care is not required to be the best possible, merely “reasonably skillful and careful”. Whether the doctor was reasonably skillful and careful is often at the heart of a medical malpractice claim.
Finally, as part of the discovery process, an injured plaintiff may be required to undergo an independent medical examination to confirm the physical injuries alleged. The law allows the defendant to identify a qualified medical expert and force the injured party to undergo a noninvasive examination. Should this occur, we will again prepare you for the examination.
In the vast majority of cases, establishing the answer to this question requires testimony from an expert medical witness. The patient (usually through an attorney) consults a doctor who specializes in the relevant field, and the doctor offers an opinion as to the proper procedures to follow when deciding whether to terminate care in cases like the patient's -- and if the proper decision is to end care, the expert will also set out the appropriate way to go about ending the doctor-patient relationship under the circumstances.
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.