More handpicked essays just for you.
Cases involving medical malpractice
Short essay about relationship between patient and doctor
Cases involving medical malpractice
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Cases involving medical malpractice
After reading all the material from this module I found that legal risks, medical malpractice claims, tort reform, and defensive medicine impact the relationship between healthcare providers and patients, by making it weak, hesitant, standoff, and usually resulting in decrease in care or over care. The relationship between the doctor and a patient should be comforting, and comfortable, private and easy going. Kessler’s (2011) study showed that doctors do practice defensive medicine, and it also showed that the tort system helps reduce the use of defensive medicine and malpractice insurance. Doctors are practicing defensive medicine because they are scared that if they do something wrong, they use it as an assurance and avoidance behavior (Studdert
Engineers, contractors, and other businesses must be mindful of and knowledgeable of their legal obligations when performing their occupation or supplying a product. Negligence in the design or construction of a product that results in damage or bodily harm, or could result in damage or bodily harm, can result in liability for economic loss under Canadian Tort law. Engineers, architects, and contractors need to be respectful of their duty of care to ensure their product is precisely produced with no danger of negligence.
Medical malpractice has become a controversial social issue. From a doctor’s standpoint, decisions and preventative actions can alter the medical malpractice lawsuits filed against them. In order to protect their career and professional life medical malpractice insurance is available. Medical professional liability insurance, sometimes known as medical malpractice insurance, is one type of professional liability insurance. “Professional liability refers to liability that arises from a failure to use due care and the standard of care expected from a person in a particular profession, in this case a doctor, dentist, nurse, hospital or other health-related organization” (Brandenburg, 2014).
Tort reform is very controversial issue. From the plaintiff’s perspective, tort reforms seems to take liability away from places such as insurance companies and hospitals which could at times leave the plaintiff without defense. From the defendant’s perspective, tort reform provides a defense from extremely large punitive damage awards. There seems to be no median between the two. Neither side will be satisfied. With the help of affiliations such as the American Tort Reform Association and Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse, many businesses and corporations are working to change the current tort system to stop these high cash awards.
By definition malpractice is “the improper or negligent treatment of a patient, as by a physician, resulting in injury, damage, or loss.” (1) Malpractice can range from a physician disclosing patient information to a doctor using un-sterilized tools during surgery. There is constantly news about doctors and hospitals facing malpractice lawsuits and doctors loosing their practicing license because of a malpractice incident. I believe there is a certain extent that malpractice law should go in order to protect patients. There are probably so many malpractice lawsuits that were mistakenly filed, blaming the physicians for occurrences that were out of their control. Individuals are quick to want to get money from suing people that have big pockets. Indeed I do believe malpractice law should be there to protect the patient, but it needs to also watch out for wrongful claims or false allegations.
Given the difficulties in the present tort system, we often become victims of the failures of medicine as opposed to beneficiaries of its many successes. Physicians have lost in that they have changed, limited, or closed their practices after having spent the most vigorous years of their lives training for such work. Patients have lost in that the physicians of their choice, with whom they have developed trusting relationships, are no longer available to care for them. It is certain that the system requires sensible reform (p.525).
Tort, one of the crucial subjects of study when analyzing common law jurisdictions. Tort, is an action which causes another person or party to suffer harm or loss []. The person who has committed a tortious act is called the tortfeasor while the person who suffered harm or loss from such act is called the injured party or the victim. Although crimes may be torts, torts may not be crimes [] simply because a tort may not have broken a law. In fact, one must understand that the key idea of tort is not to punish the tortfeasor(s) but rather to compensate the victim(s).
I am going to write this paper on tort reform, what it is and its overarching role in the documentary. Tort Reform is defined as “proposed changes in the civil justice system that aim to reduce the ability of victims to bring litigation or to reduce damages they can receive”. Another theme that I believe ties in really well with the idea of tort reform is the idea of how big of an influence money has in politics. Many people would agree that there are a lot of companies that would want tort reform so they don’t have to worry about losing millions of dollars.
Any injury to an individual which is caused by another is called a tort. We have learned so far that these torts fall under three specific types, intentional, negligence and strict liability. I am sure that if I was to sit and reflect on the past that I would be able to recall being a victim, more than once, to some form of a tort and this is probably true for most people.
...cal practice. Overall, physicians should not assume what they believe is best for their patients and should be truthful in relaying news about medical conditions, even though the diagnoses may be grave. Though the situation may look bleak, doctors need to take up the responsibility to be honest with their patients in order to honor the principle of respect for autonomy, and yet be beneficent by presenting a sense of realistic hope that treatment will succeed so that they will not easily give up on their chance of living. Only when there is a life-or-death emergency where there little time for the physician to react in both an autonomous and beneficent manner is when benevolent deception can be justified. In any other circumstances, the use of benevolent deception presents too many dangerous consequences that can negatively affect patients in a most devastating way.
Most physicians still relate to their patients using a peculiar communication style where they act as the clinicians knows best, does the most talking and makes almost all decisions for the patient. Patients are encouraged to be passive and compliant rather than being engaged.
The U.S court system has numerous cases in it, they range from multi million dollar cases (including the bank crisis, or the car business for example) to less severe cases called torts. A tort is a legal term defined as “ A wrongful act that does not include breach of contract. This offense damages the injured parties property or reputation, leaving that party able to gain compensation.” (Dictionary.com) The book The King of Torts is about a man named Clay Carter. He has a stable job, it doesn’t pay as much as he wishes. He in the scheme of one week goes from making $100,000 a year to making $5,000,000 in one case. This is all because he filed something called a mass tort (also known as a class tort).
Malpractice cases require a vast amount of attention, because if a healthcare professional makes a mistake with a treatment or outcome, it does not automatically mean that the healthcare provider committed malpractice. Medical malpractice is measured as a specific area within the wide-ranging area of negligence. In order for a medical malpractice case to be considered under the law, the claim must have one of three certain characteristics: 1) a violation in the standard of care, 2) an injury that had been caused by negligence, or 3) any injury that resulted in significant damages. The injured patient must show that the healthcare professional acted negligently during the representation of care. It requires four elements to be met for the plaintiff to recover damages: 1) a professional duty owed to the patient, 2) breach of duty, 3) injury caused by the breach, and 4) resulting damages. If the plaintiff is awarded money for the damages caused, typically they take into account both actual noneconomic loss and economic loss (e.g. pain, suffering, quality of life). The effects of malpractice on patients, whether or not they are actually involved in a legal suit, can be extensive. For a medical malpractice claim to be valid, it is not necessarily a healthcare provider violated the standard of care simply because of a patient statement. A patient must have valid proof that he or she
An answer is a pleading by the defendant that challenges the plaintiff’s right to the relief requested in the complaint. In most cases, an answer contest most of the facts in a complaint. An answer is a pleading and as such follows the same general format as the complaint or petition in the case (Kerley, Hames, & Sukys, 2009). Answers are prepared using the three formats the general denial, the specific denial, or the qualified denial. Answers can contain affirmative defenses.
The doctor patient relationship is an important connection. Doctor-patient confidentiality is based on the idea that a person should not care for medical treatment because they fear the state will share with others.
By some standards, this is a normal comparison between a person who works in a specific field and someone who does not. However, the difference lies in the fact that many other professions are regulated both internally by their code of ethics and externally by the government. For example, when a patient goes to a doctor, generally the doctor tries to do the best for the patient. There are exceptions to this because some doctors may go refuse to see a patient or give them unnecessarily expensive treatment because of the financial incentives; however, efforts are being made to remedy the health care system so that it is equitable for all patients. Another incentive for doctors to treat their patients well is that they can be sued for malpractice if they bring their patient harm. Finally, while there is information asymmetry between a doctor and patient, it is entirely possible for patients to know their rights and defend themselves if they feel as if they have been taken advantage of. These same statements are true when clients are interacting with psychologists, social workers, lawyers, and the majority of other professionals . In contrast, the financial