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.
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.
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed, stating that “true consent to what happens to one’s self is the informed exercise of a choice, and that entails an opportunity to evaluate knowledgeably the options available and the risks attendant upon each … it is the prerogative of the patient, not the physician, to determine for himself the direction in which his interests seem to lie.”
Ex.: New York has a two-and-a-half year statute of limitations for medical malpractice cases, set by New York Civil Practice Law and Rules section 214-a. Let’s say a surgeon in New York negligently leaves a foreign object in a patient during surgery. What if the patient discovers the object 3 years after the surgery? In this example, the patient still has time to sue because New York has adopted a 1 year discovery rule. This patient actually has 1 year after discovery of the object to file a lawsuit. (Note, however, that if there is proven evidence that the plaintiff missed the statute of limitations because the object should have been discovered earlier than it was, then the case could be dismissed.)
It is possible, however, to commit a criminal homicide based on wanton or reckless behavior. In other words, if someone acts with such disregard for the safety of others that death or serious injury is almost a given, this is often enough for certain types of criminal charges. However, doctors and other medical professionals are highly trained, very knowledgeable individuals. They are heavily regulated to prevent those with serious problems like substance abuse or mental disorders from causing harm. They are also under constant scrutiny and required to undergo continuing education to ensure that they are not engaging in techniques that could imperil a patient's life.
This list is not exhaustive. Nor is every item on the list a malpractice lawsuit per se. Recall the four elements above. For a psychiatrist to be liable for malpractice, he or she must have failed to take reasonable care, and the patient must have suffered injury as a result. A doctor can take reasonable care and still make an incorrect judgment call, so not every incorrect decision is actionable as malpractice. However, some items on the list—for example, engaging in a sexual relationship with a patient—almost always lead to prevailing malpractice claims.
Patients choose not to pursue valid medical-malpractice claims for numerous reasons: Some are concerned that other doctors will learn of their cases and refuse to treat them. Some fear—incorrectly—that it will lead to an increase in the cost of their medical care. And others forgo valid claims due to the perceived personal and financial costs associated with litigation.
The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) of 1976 establishes the limitations as to whether a foreign sovereign nation (or its political subdivisions, agencies, or instrumentalities) may be sued in U.S. courts—federal or state. It also establishes specific procedures for service of process and attachment of property for proceedings against a Foreign State. The FSIA provides the exclusive basis and means to bring a lawsuit against a foreign sovereign in the United States. In international law, the prohibition against suing a foreign government is known as state immunity.

Differential diagnosis is a systemic method used by doctors to identify a disease or condition in a patient. Based upon a preliminary evaluation of the patient, the doctor makes a list of diagnoses in order of probability. The physician then tests the strength of each diagnosis by making further medical observations of the patient, asking detailed questions about symptoms and medical history, ordering tests, or referring the patient to specialists. Ideally, a number of potential diagnoses will be ruled out as the investigation progresses, and only one diagnosis will remain at the end. Of course, given the uncertain nature of medicine, this is not always the case.
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. Dr. Bruce G Fagel and associates main offices are in Beverly Hills and Orange County California. All other addresses are local offices available for meetings and depositions.
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]

Duty of care was established not with patient's rights in mind per se, rather it was founded in, as worded by historian Harvey Teff, "the mystique of medicine and the strength of its professionalization.” The common layperson can not and will not comprehend the intricacies of medicine, so no objective standard may be set by non-medical professionals.

In many cases, an illness or injury becomes more difficult to treat as time passes. It is usually vital that a doctor diagnose an illness or injury in a reasonable amount of time, so that appropriate treatment can be administered. For example, a common case relates to cancer. If cancer is detected in its early stages, a patient has a much greater chance of recovery, than if it is ignored and allowed to spread. Cancer can be detected in its early stages if the doctor has a chance to examine the patient during a routine check-up. If the doctor fails to properly diagnose the symptoms of cancer, then the patient could be sent home, and the cancer could spread. However, each case is unique, and whether or not this could be considered medical negligence, depends on the specific circumstances of the case.
Medical tests can be divided into two broad categories: diagnostic tests and screening tests. Diagnostic tests are administered to patients who exhibit signs of a disease or condition, such as a woman with a lump in her breast or a man with pain and pressure in his chest. Screening tests, on the other hand, are performed on patients who are considered to be at risk of developing a disease or condition – for example, routine mammograms for women and PSA screenings for men.

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]
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.
Asking about action against licensure and malpractice history - in Mass, this is public information if you look it up on state web site. Even if it is not public info, it is still a relevant question. I'd MUCH rather have a doc explain briefly (without violating his/her own or other patients' privacy) what went wrong and how it has been corrected, than to have an MD who lies.
"The opinion upholding the judgment recognizes that although not every fiduciary relationship will give rise to a claim for damages, where the specific professional responsibility of an attending physician is to convey accurate information, then failure to do so can give rise to liability if the physician's breach results in unusual and extreme emotional distress on the part of the plaintiff," Raynes said in an email, according to AMN.
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.
Have you complied with your statute of limitations? Sometimes we have to tell veterans and service members that we cannot help them because they did not contact us soon enough. If you have a medical malpractice claim against an Army, Navy, or Air Force military hospital, you should contact us as soon as possible because your statute of limitations runs out.
The philosophy of our law firm regarding damages is simple: obtain the maximum monetary recovery possible for each client. We accomplish this by relying on our decades of experience to diligently prepare our cases for trial and aggressively advocate for our clients. Our financial resources, technological tools and access to outstanding experts in various fields allow us to provide top-notch representation to our clients.
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.
Medical malpractice claims don’t only cover errors in diagnosis and treatment. Once you’ve established a doctor-patient relationship, the doctor owes you a duty of care and treatment with the degree of skill, care, and diligence as possessed by, or expected of, a reasonably competent physician under the same or similar circumstances. Part of that duty of care is to be forthcoming with your diagnosis, treatment options and prognosis, as reasonably competent physicians would not lie to their patients.
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.
Some state courts still use the Frye test that relies on scientific consensus to assess the admissibility of novel scientific evidence. Daubert expressly rejected the earlier federal rule's incorporation of the Frye test. (Daubert, 509 U.S. at 593-594) Expert testimony that would have passed the Frye test is now excluded under the more stringent requirements of Federal Rules of Evidence as construed by Daubert.
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed, stating that “true consent to what happens to one’s self is the informed exercise of a choice, and that entails an opportunity to evaluate knowledgeably the options available and the risks attendant upon each … it is the prerogative of the patient, not the physician, to determine for himself the direction in which his interests seem to lie.”
×