More handpicked essays just for you.
Research paper on malpractice in healthcare
Medical malpractice argimentive paper
Subtopics of medical malpractice
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Research paper on malpractice in healthcare
On April 6, 2016 at approximately 1:30pm, a civil case of medical malpractice of Aubreigh Michelle Washington, the plaintiff who was represented by her mother, against DCH Health Care Authority, the defendant, was presided by Judge Almond. The plaintiff’s attorney began the session by introducing a deposition testimony from Aubreigh’s doctor from the DCH Health Care. In the testimony, the attorney had questioned the doctor about the how long he has been Aubriegh’s doctor and her medical conditions. The Health Care staff had apparently perform a medical practice without Aubreigh’s mother consent, breaching their duty of care. The plaintiff’s deposition testimony of the defendant conveyed to the jury that the doctor had perform unknowingly on
The evidence presented to myself and the other juror’s proves that Tyrone Washburn is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the murder of his wife, Elena Washburn. On March 12, 1979 Elena Washburn was strangled in the living room of her family’s home. Her body was then dragged to the garage, leaving a trail of blood from the living room to the place it was found. Her husband, Tyrone Washburn, found her in the family’s garage on March 13, 1979 at 1:45 A.M. When officer Dale Chambers arrived at the scene he found her lying face down in a pool of blood. The solid evidence in this case proves only one person, Tyrone Washburn, is guilty of murder.
Adae Cynthia’s husband telephoned Dr. Avera about Cynthia’s hospitalization and relayed that she was suffering from continuing pain. Upon Dr. Avera's recommendation that he should transport his wife to the Middletown Regional Hospital emergency room, where Cynthia was seen by Tao Nguyen, M.D. They started by giving Cynthia a CT scan of her chest and head, which ended up being negative result for pulmonary embolism but it did reveal a sinus infection. Dr. Nguyen requested copies of her medical records from Clinton memorial hospital but Clinton’s record department was closed for the weekend. Dr. Nguyen discussed Cynthia’s case with Dr. Avera and instructed her to follow up with Dr. Avera on Monday, July 3. She was discharged with a prescription for pain medication. On the same day laboratory reported to a resident on duty that Cynthia’s blood cultures were showing gram positive cocci in clusters. The next day the laboratory reported to Dr.Pesante the Cynthia’s blood cultures were positive for staphylococcus aureus. Neither the resident on duty nor Dr. Pesante contacted Dr. Bain or the attending physician on-call about Cynthia’s blood culture results. The trial court found it unclear whether any Clinton memorial hospital employee attempted to contact appellees or Dr. Avera. Dr. Avera said if he would have learned of the positive blood culture she would have admitted her immediately to hospital and would have empirically started her on antibiotics and then
Facts: A minor and his mother filed suit for damages against Tri-County Orthopedic physicians for false diagnose and filling a child abuse reports. The Michigan Court of Appeals rule that child abuse reporting statue provides immunity to persons who file the child abuse was report in good faith even if the reports were a negligent diagnosis which was cause of the child bone fractures. The court also appealed that damage of shame and humiliation was not recoverable to Michigan statute. Immunity from liability did not extend for damages of malpractice which has been the result from the failure to diagnose the child disease.
In the controversial court case, McCulloch v. Maryland, Chief Justice John Marshall’s verdict gave Congress the implied powers to carry out any laws they deemed to be “necessary and proper” to the state of the Union. In this 1819 court case, the state of Maryland tried to sue James McCulloch, a cashier at the Second Bank of the United States, for opening a branch in Baltimore. McCulloch refused to pay the tax and therefore the issue was brought before the courts; the decision would therefore change the way Americans viewed the Constitution to this day.
.... Madison was applied to this decision because the actions committed were unconstitutional. According to the Supreme Court the 8th Amendment was broken because the District Court of Appeal was giving a cruel and unusual punishment to Graham. The 8th amendment claus does not allow a juvenile offender to be sentenced to life in jail without a parole for a non-homicidal crime. Therefore Terrance could not fall through with this punishment.
Learning from what Dr. Anna Pou had to face with the lawsuits she was dealing with makes me cringe. As Healthcare professionals, having to worry of possibly being sued for believing what is right for the patient or as a whole for the hospitals health is ridiculous. Healthcare professionals like Dr. Pou, have taken the Hippocratic oath, and one of the promises made within that oath is “first, do no harm”. Often time’s society look at courts cases as a battle versus two oppositions, but Dr. Pou’s case it is not. In her statements from national television she states saying her role was to ‘‘help’’ patients ‘‘through their pain,’’.
Lynch vs. Clarke (1844) was the most important case before the passage of the Fourteenth amendment dealing with this matter. It involved the discussion of whether Julia Lynch was a citizen or not. The nature of this case meant that she must either have been born a natural born citizen because she was born to her parents, that although were aliens, on U.S. soil, or that she was not a citizen at all because her parents were aliens regardless of the place of her birth that she had never made any attempt to be naturalized. The court ruled in her favor. The ruling established that under the common law of England, Julia Lunch would be considered a natural born citizen of the U.S., the common law of England formed the basis
Ohio Dep’t of Rehabilitation & Correction are the poor-quality patient care that Tomcik received and Tomcik’s health being at risk. Once engaged in a doctor-patient relationship, physicians are obligated to provide the best possible care for the patient by utilizing their skills and knowledge as expected from a competent physician under the same or similar conditions (“What Is a Doctor’s Duty of Care?” n.d.). However, in Tomcik’s situation, Dr. Evans did not deliver high-quality care, for he administered a perfunctory breast examination and thus did not follow standard protocols. There is evidence of indifference conveyed by Dr. Evans, and the lack of proper care towards Tomcik is an issue that can be scrutinized and judged appropriately. Additionally, Tomcik’s health was at risk due to the failure of a proper physical evaluation and the incredibly long delay in diagnosis and treatment. The negligence from Dr. Evans, along with the lack of medical attention sought out by Tomcik after she had first discovered the lump in her breast, may contribute to Tomcik’s life being in danger as well as the emotional anguish she may have felt during that time period. Overall, the incident of Tomcik’s expectations from the original physician and other employees at the institution not being met is an ethical issue that should be dealt with
Homer Plessy vs. the Honorable John H. Ferguson ignited the spark in our nation that ultimately led to the desegregation of our schools, which is shown in the equality of education that is given to all races across the country today. “The Plessy decision set the precedent that ‘separate’ facilities for blacks and whites were constitutional as long as they were ‘equal’” (“The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow”). The case of Plessy vs. Ferguson not only illuminated the racial inequality within our education system, but also brought to light how the standard of ‘separate but equal’ affected every aspect of African American lives.
...who violated Randy’s rights. With such little evidence from the Plaintiff, and the fact that Caruso is not a medical professional, she was not involved in the making of policies and procedures relating to medical matters. Therefore, Caruso did not act with deliberate indifference and was entitled summary judgment, because Plaintiff Parsons failed to provide sufficient evidence on Caruso.
FACTS: Dr. Robert Lee Berry (Defendant) was a practicing anesthesiologist, who practiced with Dr William Preau and Dr. Mark Dennis. He was also shareholder in Lakeview Anesthesia Associates, LAA (defendant). Berry also had staff privileges at Lakeview Medical Center (LMC) (Defendant). In Nov 2000, Lakeview (Defendant) investigated Dr. Robert Berry after nurses concern. In March 2001, Berry was found groggy, unfit to work and sleeping in a chair, Based on this incident and suspicions that Barry was stealing Demerol from the hospital, he was terminated from LAA and Lakeview and his LMC staff privileges were withdrawn. Afterward, Berry applied for job as anaestheologist in Kadlec Medical Center (plaintiff). Before employing Kadlec, the facility sent a letter to Lakeview requesting recommendations and included a questionnaire with specific questions to be answered.
Society experience arbitrariness in different ways and aspects of life; since childhood, our upbringing is full of arbitrariness, at home, we experience arbitrariness from our parents or guardians, when grown up, we perceive arbitrariness in our employment environment, and even at sports events; but in criminology when arbitrariness occurs, we recognize that our criminal justice system is shattered and that each person or party that partakes on such process contributes a level of arbitrariness that is unconscionable. Since our culture has experienced arbitrariness in all aspects of life, arbitrariness goes unnoticed most of the time, our society has grown so accustom to it that it will not try to avoid it. However, when it comes to person
Miller v. Alabama was a case that was taken to trial on March 19, 2012. The case was resolved on June 24, 2012. The case involved Evan Miller and violating the eighth amendment with respect to life sentences. The eighth amendment states that excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. The main impact this case had on criminal law was the United States Supreme Court ruled that it is unconstitutional to give a life-without-parole sentence on someone who was a minor at the time of the crime committed. Miller v. Alabama was a case where the eighth amendment was violated due to unusual punishment placed upon a fourteen year old boy and a impact
Facts of the case: The plaintiff was a housewife living in Livonia, Michigan along with her husband and children. She wanted to apply for divorce due to the difficulties in their marital life and informed her husband about divorce two months prior to this incident. On December 6, 1963, the defendant came to the plaintiffs’ house by introducing himself as “Dr. Wolodzko” who had never met the couple before. Except that, the plaintiff did not know that he was a psychiatrist or he was there to examine her as requested by her husband. The plaintiff spoke with the defendant on telephone by the suggestion of Livonia police woman due to the domestic quarrel with her husband and at that time he informed himself as a psychiatrist to the plaintiff.
“Research has found that just 1 percent of U.S. doctors are at fault in a third of the medical malpractice claims paid out in 2016.”( manning) this quote is elaborating on how the number of malpractice cases may be high but the percentage of doctors convicted of malpractice is very low at 1%. A doctor's main goal is to provide care for their patients and give them the best care of their ability to help them. When becoming a doctor you have to take an oath about providing care to any patient no matter what. A lot of patients have good outcomes and different recoveries from treatments but that's just depending on the treatment and the individual. With only 1% of doctors actually being convicted of malpractice it makes the number of cases not look as reliable because a case can be filed but dropped. Malpractice in this case is being blown out of