They even let me know if they're going to be letting a student do my blood draw, and they sure as hell better let me know if there's any risk I'm entrusting my life to a hack. (I once found out a doc who tried to push a drug on me represented Lily or whoever was making tht drug...so I wonder if they should be required to provide all this info up front, whether asked or not. I have an effing right to know who is slicing me up.)

In the UK, does the General Medical Council require physicians to report criminal convictions and is this open to the public? What about malpractice issues? I live in the U.S. and in my state (requirements may vary by state) physicians are required to report criminal convictions, malpractice, etc and this is posted online for the public to access. The problem is physicians who are convicted of crimes (like my former psychiatrist) don't always report it, so I'm not sure how effective it is in practice. There is no absolute right to privacy for physicians, at least not in my state.
Counties and municipalities are not entitled to sovereign immunity. In Lincoln County v. Luning,[17] the Court held that the Eleventh Amendment does not bar an individual's suit in federal court against a county for nonpayment of a debt. By contrast, a suit against a statewide agency is considered a suit against the state under the Eleventh Amendment.[18] In allowing suits against counties and municipalities, the Court was unanimous, relying in part on its "general acquiescence" in such suits over the prior thirty years. William Fletcher, a professor of legal studies at Yale University, explains the different treatment on the ground that in the nineteenth century, a municipal corporation was viewed as more closely analogous to a private corporation than to a state government.[citation needed]
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.
That said, medical professionals such as Doctors rightly hold a position of respect, value and authority in our society, so when they have failed to fulfil the high standards expected of them, it can be difficult to know what to do. The health and wellbeing of you or a loved one may have been adversely affected, and without medical knowledge, it can often be difficult to know whether the negative impacts suffered were unavoidable or whether they classify as negligent, and you should, therefore, report your Doctor.
When you consider the time it takes for your attorney to conduct an initial investigation, gather the facts and early evidence, track down a medical expert, conduct required settlement negotiations and/or go through the medical screening panel or other pre-suit requirements, you can begin to see why most medical malpractice plaintiffs are in a scramble to beat the limitations deadline from the moment they decide to sue. (To find your state's time limit to file a medical malpractice case, see this chart.)
In this case a surgeon was sued by his patient following complications from a laparoscopic cholecystectomy (gall bladder removal). Before the procedure he explained the risks of the surgery to her, and she also asked him questions about his experience and success rate with the procedure. She asked additional questions about whether he had ever been sued for malpractice or had any action taken against his medical license. He answered no to both questions and added that he had an almost perfect success rate with the surgery. Well, bad things happened. The patient suffered a perforated intestine and an infection. She later found out that the doctor had lost a patient during this same procedure, and that he was disciplined for the board as a result of that case.
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 getting to court. The findings of the review panel can be presented in court, and courts often rely on a review panel's finding of no medical malpractice to throw out a case before it goes to trial.
Emotionally fragile patients. If a doctor knows that the patient is so distressed that he or she will refuse needed treatment, the doctor may not be required to get the patient's informed consent. For example, if a brain tumor is life threatening, but removal entails frightening risks like paralysis, it may be appropriate for the doctor to be vague in her description of the risks.
During discovery both sides have an opportunity to force the other side to produce documents and other relevant materials such as medical records, tax returns, social security records, etc. They also have the opportunity to interview relevant witnesses under oath in a process known as a deposition. Prior to your deposition, we will work closely with you to ensure that you make the most effective presentation possible.

Numerous factors can cause surgical errors including lack of safety protocols before surgery, communication problems between the surgeon and operating room nurses, having more than one surgeon involved, time pressure to finish a surgery and failure to monitor a patient adequately during and after surgery and respond to changes in the patient’s condition.
Canada has a single-payer health insurance scheme that covers virtually all residents.  Most physicians are in private practice and they bill the insurance plans for their services.  Being in private practice, they require medical liability insurance.  This is usually obtained through a professional organization.  However, physicians are reimbursed for a large portion of their insurance premiums by provincial governments.  Fees are lower than in the United States for a number of reasons.  Two of these are that Canada’s highest courts have set limits on awards and the country’s liability laws make establishing professional negligence more difficult.  Another is that the physicians’ insurance company defends lawsuits very vigorously.
Incidentally, even when I was one week out of school if a patient asked when I graduated I told them the truth. Early on I did see an occasional look of fear at learning I was a newbie, but none of them asked for someone else. However, if they had asked for someone else that would have been their right and I would have respected their wishes. It's their money, their body, and their decision.

Hi. I recently got a hernia surgery. Before surgery, dr said I'll be fully recovered in 2 weeks. After surgery he said I would feel the pain for 4-6 weeks. Also, he wouldn't perscribed painkillers after the first two weeks, telling me to take advil, return to full activity, and to not be a chicken. After painkillers stopped, I noticed sharp nerve pains shooting in my abs and pelvis, ranging from mild to SEVERE. I even went to the ER because of it. The dr claimed it has nothing to do with his surgery and told me to see my physician and he couldn't help me further.


If you file a complaint with the medical board and then file suit, know that the medical board can only take administrative action against the doctor’s license to practice medicine. It can’t help you pursue a medical malpractice case. It also can’t disclose any information that it collects during the course of its review with you or your family members.
The concept of medical responsibility can be traced back to the Code of Hammurabi, which is an extensive legal document from ancient Mesopotamia. The Code of Hammurabi states that, “If the doctor has treated a gentlemen with a lancet of bronze and has caused the gentleman to die, or has opened an abscess of the eye for a gentleman with a bronze lancet, and has caused the loss of the gentleman’s eye, one shall cut off his hands” (Smith 1931 as cited within Bal 2009). Of course, penalties for malpractice in most modern, developed nations are much more civilized. However, the Code of Hammurabi introduced the concept of holding medical professionals accountable for deaths or injuries that could have reasonably been prevented.
Have you filed your Standard Form 95? Did you fill it out correctly? Often, we have veterans and service members or their families that call us after they have filed their own Form 95. Many times, we must file amended Form 95s to correct legal, medical, or other errors that are made. Some times, we must tell these individuals that we cannot help them due to a fatal error in filing their Form 95 that cannot be corrected under the law.
In the United States, there are many jurisdictional issues that could bar bringing a claim in an American court. Litigants would have to establish that the doctor had sufficient contacts with the United States for it to exert jurisdiction over him or her. Even if the court does find that it can take jurisdiction over the case, it has to determine which nation and state’s laws would apply.
Please note that we cannot guarantee the results or outcome of your particular procedure. For instance, the government may reject a trademark application for legal reasons beyond the scope of LegalZoom's service. In some cases, a government backlog can lead to long delays before your process is complete. Similarly, LegalZoom does not guarantee the results or outcomes of the services rendered by our legal plan attorneys or attorney-assisted products. Problems like these are beyond our control and are not covered by this guarantee.
During discovery both sides have an opportunity to force the other side to produce documents and other relevant materials such as medical records, tax returns, social security records, etc. They also have the opportunity to interview relevant witnesses under oath in a process known as a deposition. Prior to your deposition, we will work closely with you to ensure that you make the most effective presentation possible.
The United States Government will pay $42 million to the parents of a young child who suffered a permanent brain injury, resulting from improper use of forceps during his delivery.  After a six day trial in Federal Court in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, the verdict for $42 million was rendered by U.S. District Court Judge Sylvia Rambo.  The parents sued the Federal Government in a malpractice claim involving an Ob/Gyn physician, who was employed at a federal facility.  The lawsuit claimed that the doctor improperly used forceps on the baby’s head during the delivery, which caused skull fractures and bleeding on the brain that resulted in permanent brain damage.  Evidence presented during trial showed that the now five year old boy cannot speak, read or write and eventually will require a motorized wheelchair to get around.
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.
Where the Canadian system differs most significantly from that of the United States is in how health insurance is provided.  In Canada, all of the provinces have a single health insurance program that covers virtually all residents.  For example, Ontario has the Ontario Health Insurance Plan[2] and Quebec has the Quebec Health Insurance Plan.[3] The federal government subsidizes these provincial health insurance plans through its general revenues.  There are no separate payroll deductions to fund the health care plans and Canada does not have a separate old-age health care program like Medicare in the United States.
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.

ADR models are spreading and may vastly improve the legal landscape, but they also necessitate a shift in medical culture. Patients may receive smaller  payouts than they would in the traditional adversarial legal system at trial. However, they may also get compensated more efficiently, by reducing the cost of proceeding through lengthy litigation and trial.  In addition, patients in this model may feel that they have more honest interactions with their care providers (Kass and Ross 2016).


Investigation: Before a case is even filed with the Connecticut courts, it is essential that an initial investigation of the matter be completed. Our team works with medical experts in the field to determine whether medical negligence was committed by your doctor or any other medical professional. Our lawyers then determine how that negligence caused your injury.
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.
Under the abrogation doctrine, while Congress cannot use its Article I powers to subject states to lawsuits in either federal courts, Seminole Tribe v. Florida, or a fortiori its own courts, Alden, supra, it can abrogate a state's sovereign immunity pursuant to the powers granted to it by §5 of the Fourteenth Amendment, and thus subject them to lawsuits. Seminole, supra; Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer. However:
The vast majority of cases will ultimately hinge on which medical expert the jury decides to believe. It is true that as the case develops and the experts are deposed, your attorney may have more of an educated guess about how things might go in court, but there will never be certainty. Medical facts are too complex and the influences on jurors too unpredictable.
×