Common defenses against medical malpractice claims show avoidable consequences. Many states have “Good Samaritan” laws, which protect people who come to the aid of people in medical distress. Doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals are usually specifically included in such laws. This means that if a doctor helps someone in an emergency situation, they will be protected from civil liability in case something goes wrong during the rescue.
However, in general, a medical professional who voluntarily helps someone owes that person the same duty of care and treatment as that of a reasonably competent doctor under the same or similar circumstances. For example, if an attorney doesn't file something on time, this error in and of itself does not constitute legal negligence. Likewise, defendants may challenge any of these four facts in their own defense, arguing, for example, that there was no doctor-patient relationship or that their care met the standards accepted by the medical profession. In recent years, many jurisdictions have relaxed their rules of causation, allowing plaintiffs to file medical malpractice lawsuits when the negligence of a medical professional prevented access to a better chance of survival or recovery.
It is a difficult and fact-intensive defense, since the defendant must demonstrate that their actions were taken in a reasonable manner and that they have not seriously breached the duty of care. When the discovery rule applies, for example, the defendant may attempt to provide evidence that the patient discovered the alleged malpractice within the original two-year statute of limitations, but failed to file his claim in a timely manner. Medical malpractice is a form of negligence, so many of the defenses allowed against general negligence lawsuits are also viable against malpractice lawsuits. If you think you have a medical malpractice lawsuit or you simply want to know more about your legal rights and responsibilities as a patient, you can consult an experienced medical malpractice attorney.
If a medical professional can demonstrate that the injury would not have occurred had it not been for the patient's negligent act, they may have a valid defense against a negligence claim. Most states agree that injured patients, even those who have been harmed by malpractice, should exercise all reasonable precautions to reduce the consequences of physician negligence. Like the plaintiffs, the defendants will bring together expert witnesses for their defense and will ask other medical professionals to demonstrate that their choices during diagnosis or treatment were acceptable. Unfortunately, everyone makes mistakes, and sometimes patients can unfairly accuse doctors of committing an act of medical negligence when the expected results are not achieved.
While the decision may place a doctor out of the mainstream medical mainstream, he could have a valid defense against a medical malpractice lawsuit if a respectable minority of medical professionals support the line of treatment. Many medical malpractice defendants attempt to prove that the plaintiff has lost an opportunity to file a lawsuit, arguing that the state's statute of limitations for medical negligence has expired. You can also find more introductory information on this topic in the FindLaw medical malpractice section. For a legal malpractice lawsuit to succeed, the attorney must have owed the plaintiff a duty of care.
Traditionally, courts took this defense very seriously and held that the plaintiff could only recover damages if the patient could demonstrate that his chances of survival would have been significantly higher if the diagnosis and treatment had been made earlier. .
Leave a Comment