Wednesday, October 2, 2019
Medical Malpractice :: Medicine Lawsuits Canada Health Care
Medical Malpractice      The doctor-patient relationship has been defined differently through the  years. In the beginning it developed into a "common calling" which meant  doctors practiced medicine as a duty to their patients. Laws were developed to  protect patients, therefore doctors used proper care and expert skill. In the  past six centuries, medical malpractice has increased, which lead to revision  and addition to the law. Liability was introduced along with the "GIANT of all  torts", negligence. Now in today's society, a doctor's duty is to use  reasonable care, skill and judgment in the practice of his/her profession and  when negligent, take full responsibility.    What is malpractice? Malpractice is negligence. Negligence is a tort. A  tort is a civil wrong, therefore malpractice is a civil wrong. In its  simplest terms, malpractice has four essential elements: 1) Duty. Every  health care provider assumes a duty when starting consultations, diagnosis, or  treatment of a patient. The duty arises from an expressed or implied contract.  2) Breach. For example, if you fail to make a correct diagnosis once you have  assumed the duty to do so, you have created a "breach of duty", due and owing to  the patient. 3) Causal Connection. Your failure to correctly diagnose,  ("duty" you "breached") the duty due and owing to the patient and as a direct  and proximate cause of your breach, caused damages. 4) Damages. The result of  your failure to diagnose correctly, the patient sustained damages in the form of  an additional hospital stay, complications that may or may not be of a permanent  and continuing nature. (Brooten Jr., Kenneth E. p. 1) Negligence is the most  common civil suit filed against doctors. Liability for negligence will not be  found unless the following factors are present: (a) the defendant must owe a  duty to the plaintiff to exercise care; (b) the defendant must breach the  standard of care established by law for his/her conduct; (c) the plaintiff  must suffer loss or injury as a result of this breach; (d) the conduct of the  defendant must be the "proximate cause" of the plaintiff's loss or injury. (  Picard, Ellen I. p. 29) In the case of Adderly v. Bremner (Picard, Ellen I. p.  461) the defendant physician was negligent in not changing the syringes to  vaccinate 38 patients and instead used one needle for every two patients. As a  consequence, the plaintiff was infected with septicemia (blood poisoning).  This doctor failed to give the required standard of care. Any reasonable doctor  would have in fact changed the syringe after each patient and would have  foreseen the consequences for not changing them.  					    
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
 
 
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.