Medical Malpractice Law under Personal Injury
Medical Malpractice Law Under Personal Injury
What Is Medical Malpractice?
Medical malpractice is a subset of personal injury law that deals specifically with claims arising from the negligence or wrongful acts of healthcare professionals. It occurs when a healthcare provider (such as a doctor, nurse, hospital, or clinic) fails to provide the accepted standard of medical care, resulting in injury or harm to the patient.
Medical Malpractice vs. General Personal Injury
Personal Injury Law: Encompasses all injuries caused by negligence or intentional acts, including car accidents, slip and falls, and medical malpractice.
Medical Malpractice Law: Focuses exclusively on negligence within the medical profession.
Legal Elements of Medical Malpractice Claims
To succeed in a medical malpractice lawsuit, the plaintiff (patient) must prove the following four elements:
Duty of Care
The healthcare provider owed a duty to the patient.
This is established by the existence of a doctor-patient relationship.
Breach of Duty
The provider failed to conform to the accepted standard of care.
This means the healthcare professional acted in a way that a reasonably competent professional would not have.
Causation
The breach of duty directly caused the patient’s injury.
Both actual cause (the injury would not have occurred “but for” the breach) and proximate cause (the injury was a foreseeable result) must be established.
Damages
The patient suffered harm or loss as a result (physical injury, financial loss, emotional distress).
Standard of Care in Medical Malpractice
The standard of care refers to the level and type of care an ordinarily skilled and competent healthcare professional would provide under similar circumstances. This standard varies by:
Medical specialty (e.g., cardiologist vs. general practitioner)
Location (local vs. national standards)
Time period (medical practices evolve)
Proof and Role of Expert Witnesses
In medical malpractice cases, expert testimony is almost always required to establish the standard of care and to prove breach and causation.
The expert is typically a healthcare professional in the same field who testifies about what the standard practices are and whether the defendant violated those standards.
Common Types of Medical Malpractice
Misdiagnosis or delayed diagnosis
Surgical errors
Medication errors
Birth injuries
Failure to obtain informed consent
Failure to treat
Important Case Laws in Medical Malpractice
1. Helling v. Carey (1974)
Facts: An ophthalmologist failed to perform a simple glaucoma test on a patient because it was not the usual practice for people under 40. The patient later went blind.
Holding: The court ruled in favor of the patient, stating that the physician should have administered the test because it was a simple, inexpensive test that could have prevented injury.
Significance: The case established that the standard of care must take into account reasonable precautions to prevent injury, even if such precautions are not routine.
2. Canterbury v. Spence (1972)
Facts: The patient underwent back surgery and was not informed of the risk of paralysis, which occurred after the procedure.
Holding: The court ruled that doctors must disclose all material risks to patients (informed consent). Failure to do so can constitute malpractice.
Significance: This case set a precedent for the duty to inform patients about risks, alternatives, and possible outcomes.
3. Miller v. Kennedy (1976)
Facts: A hospital failed to diagnose and treat a patient with a serious infection in a timely manner, leading to death.
Holding: The court found the hospital liable for negligence because they breached the standard of care by not responding appropriately to the symptoms.
Significance: Reinforced that hospitals, as well as individual providers, can be held liable for malpractice.
4. Lopez v. United States (2005)
Facts: A military hospital failed to diagnose cancer in a timely manner, and the delay worsened the patient’s condition.
Holding: The court held the government liable under the Federal Tort Claims Act because the medical personnel breached their duty of care.
Significance: Shows that even government-run medical facilities can be sued for malpractice under personal injury law.
Patient’s Legal Rights in Medical Malpractice
Right to Compensation: Patients can recover damages for physical injuries, pain and suffering, medical expenses, lost wages, and other losses.
Right to Information: Patients have a right to receive full information about their medical condition and treatment options.
Right to Privacy: Patients have rights under laws such as HIPAA to keep their medical information confidential.
Right to File a Lawsuit: Patients can pursue legal action within the statute of limitations, which varies by jurisdiction but is often 1–3 years.
Defenses Commonly Raised by Healthcare Providers
No breach of the standard of care: Arguing the care provided was appropriate.
Causation not proven: The injury would have occurred regardless of the provider’s actions.
Contributory negligence: The patient’s own actions contributed to the injury.
Assumption of risk: The patient was informed of risks and consented.
Summary
Medical malpractice law is a specialized branch of personal injury law that holds healthcare providers accountable for professional negligence. It requires detailed proof of duty, breach, causation, and damages, often supported by expert testimony. Important case law has shaped principles like the standard of care and informed consent, protecting patients’ rights to safe, informed medical treatment.
RELATED Blog
0 comments