What is Medical Malpractice?
•    Medical malpractice refers to a professional act of negligence or glaring omission, delivered by a medical professional or health care provider.
•    Medical malpractice is an illegal action; the negligent care provided by a medical institution or medical professional precipitates an injury or death to the patient.
•    All medical professionals as well as health care providers must adhere to the established regulations and standards instituted by the state government (as well as the federal government) in which they operate out of. Although these regulations vary by location, general human’s rights issues are enshrouded in the code. Any care that blatantly disrupts a patient’s health or any procedures that are improperly administered, or conducted with negligence that precipitate an injury or death may be tried in a court system under the statutes which govern medical malpractice.
•    Typically medical malpractice cases are initiated by patients who feel they have been misdiagnosed, mistreated, or handled with negligence. These patients, as a result of the faulty medical care, become inflicted with increased bodily damage or even death. Following this unfortunate circumstance, the patient or the patient’s family, will then initiate a medical malpractice suit in the hopes of retaining a financial settlement to recoup the monetary and emotional damages that were caused from the mistreatment. In addition to compensatory rulings, more severe medical malpractice cases—typically those that result in the premature death of the patient–will evaluate the doctor’s or medical professional’s motives in relation to an involuntary manslaughter charge.
•     As a result of the financial issues which surround a medical malpractice charge, all medical professionals are required to assume and maintain professional liability insurance. These policies are designed to offset the risk and the legal costs that stem from medical malpractice charges.
•    Depending on the circumstances, a doctor or medical professional would be liable, and thus susceptible to a medical malpractice charge, for such maneuvers as prescribing experimental drugs, performing cosmetic surgeries, or initiating alternative-based surgeries or medical treatments to a patient.

Elements of a Medical Malpractice Case
•    In a medical malpractice suit, the plaintiff is the patient, or a legally designated party who acts on behalf of the patient—these parties are assigned in wrongful death suits. In contrast, the defendant is the health care provider or medical professional who precipitated the injury or death.
•    In order to receive a favorable ruling, a plaintiff must establish and definitively prove the following four elements of tort negligence:
1.    A duty must be owed; a legal duty is realized whenever a health care provider or medical professional undertakes care or delivers treatment for a patient.
2.    The duty then must be breached; the provider must fail to meet and conform to the relevant standards of care. The standard of care is examined based on expert testimony or through the observance of obvious errors. The standard care refers to the normal treatment methods for similar medical issues.
3.    The breach, meaning the negligent action or omission, must precipitate bodily injury; the breach must be a proximate cause of the physical injury.
4.    The patient must suffer from physical damages; without the presence of damages (the losses may be emotional or pecuniary) there is no true basis for a claim. This notion exists, regardless of whether the provider was negligent.

What is a Medical Malpractice Case?

• Medical malpractice occurs when a doctor or another medical professional (such as a nurse or technician) partakes in a negligent action or delivers a fraudulent action that causes an injury to a patient. If you need legal advice and assistance, contact medical malpractice lawyers.

• A victim of medical malpractice–an individual who experiences an injury at the hands of a wrongful or negligent action by their medical professional—will initiate a medical malpractice case to seek a recoupment for their losses. When an individual is injured through the actions of their health care provider, they will invariably incur damages through the presence of lost wages, emotional damages, or additional medical costs. As a result of these costs, the individual will file a medical malpractice case in the hopes of obtaining a financial settlement.

• All medical malpractice cases are heard by a district court; the actual trial is similar to a negligent tort case. The verdict is handed down by a judge of a public court system.

• To initiate a medical practice case you must meet the requirements of a negligent tort claim. Medical malpractice claims, in essence, are attempts taken by a plaintiff to definitively prove an act of negligence that directly caused an injury or death. The following elements must be proven to deliver a favorable settlement for a plaintiff in a medical malpractice lawsuit:

• The health care provider must initiate a legal duty, meaning the medical staff or hospital must accept a patient for care—they must perform a medical operation, give a diagnosis, or treat a patient.

• The physical duty undertaken by the medical provider must be breached or delivered in such a way that directly violates the relevant standard of care.

• The breach of the physical duty must cause an injury to the patient. The action must be considered negligent or wrongful and must directly lead to an injury suffered by the patient.

• The patient must suffer from tangible injuries or damages as a result of the doctor or medical provider’s actions.

How to File a Medical Malpractice Lawsuit?

• A medical malpractice is typically defined as negligence—it is a failure to act as a prudent medical professional would under similar circumstances. To file a medical malpractice suit you must first investigate the standards of care regulated by the American Medical Association and the National Institute of Health.

• Gather as much information about your particular case as you can. Start at the beginning; record appointment dates, doctors’ names, referrals to other doctors, and any bills or costs related to medical malpractice, including all lost wages and opportunity costs incurred.

• Following your investigation, and the obtainment of all necessary documents, hire a medical malpractice attorney to facilitate your claim. Be sure to choose an experienced medical malpractice attorney who is well-versed in the various laws and interpretations of medical laws in your particular jurisdiction. Conduct interviews to gather all information concerning your prospective malpractice lawyer. After you hire a medical malpractice attorney, be sure to deliver all information and copies of essential documents upon meeting him or her.

What is Medical Malpractice Insurance?

• Medical malpractice insurance is a financial-based instrument available only to physicians or those individuals involved in healthcare. By purchasing a medical malpractice policy, the physician or medical professional is protected in the event of a judgment against them for medical negligence, malfeasance, or in general malpractice.

• The majority of states in America require that physicians have some form of medical malpractice insurance to protect them from a faulty or negligent action. In addition to a state mandate, the majority of hospitals or medical institutions will require physicians to be obtain a form of coverage—institutions will require the obtainment of a policy to protect them against costly settlements.

How Medical Malpractice Insurance Works

• A physician will purchase a medical malpractice policy from either a commercial insurance company or a mutual insurance company that is operated by a health care provider or medical professional. The physician can either choose individual coverage or be a part of a policy that incorporates the underlying practice or institution in which the doctor is employed.

• The form of coverage purchased is dictated by the individual physician’s employer. Those doctors or medical professionals employed by the United States Federal Government will not be required to purchase a medical malpractice insurance policy—any lawsuit against the federal government is self-insured.

How is the Medical Malpractice Premium Determined?

• The majority of physicians are rarely sued or sued infrequently. As a result, the data attached to a premium calculation is actuarially unsound. This characteristic makes it impossible for a physician to be “rated” or “classified” based on past history. In addition, the claims filed against a doctor are based on circumstance, making the issues concerning with a premium determinant difficult to gauge.

• As oppose to past histories, the premiums associated with medical malpractice insurance are determined based on specialty. All physicians are classified based on their medical field or their specialty.  Each classification is attached to a rate based on the probability of an occurrence of a medical malpractice issue. For example, orthopedic surgeons are more susceptible (as a result of the skill required to perform surgery) to negligent actions or mistakes, and as a result, are more likely to face a medical malpractice suit. As a result of this general susceptibility, orthopedic surgeons will face higher premiums for their medical malpractice insurance policies. In addition, the location of the physicians or medical professionals practice, will affect the premium level.

• As a result of the rising number of medical malpractice cases, insurance companies are realizing that the business of offering medical malpractice insurance is not indisputably profitable. This realization has increased premiums and placed a strain on the medical field.

What is a Medical Negligence Claim?

• A medical negligence claim is a direct legal action taken by a patient who falls victim to the negligent or wrongful actions of a medical provider or medical professional. All medical professionals work under a code of ethics. Considering the importance of their role, all physicians and medical professionals are required to provide suitable support and medical advice to their patients. These actions must be delivered in the patient’s best interest to accurately treat, diagnosis, or rehabilitate the individual. A failure to deliver this expected course of conduct may result in the filing of a medical negligence claim.

• To be considered medical negligence, the patient in question must suffer from an injury or some form of damage that arose from the medical professional’s actions.  These actions are not always direct; a misdiagnosis or a faulty prescription can result in long-term effects. Regardless of the specifics, all medical negligent claims are filed because the patient (who expected to receive suitable care) was injured, harmed, or suffered some form of loss as a result of the doctor’s negligent or wrongful actions.

• Medical negligent claims are filed through the civil court system of the particular jurisdiction in which the negligent or wrongful action took place. A medical negligent claim is filed by the patient to recoup finances from their injury. When an individual falls victim to a negligent or fraudulent medical action they will invariably suffer from sort of pain—emotional or physical pain must be present which results in the loss of wages or emotional distress.

• The laws associated with medical negligence claims–meaning the grounds for what constitute a medical negligent action—are dictated through state interpretation. Medical negligence is not always a direct issue; similar to other personal injury claims the negligent actions must be directly linked to the patient’s suffering.

• In addition to the varying interpretations, all states possess different statues of limitations that regulate when a medical negligence suit can be filed.

How to File a Medical Negligence Case

• To recoup finances lost from an injury or emotional distress caused by a doctor’s actions, you must gather all information regarding your particular case. A list of the doctor’s actions, all appointments with the underlying medical provider, prescriptions, diagnoses, and a proof of wages or time lost due to the injury must be presented at the medical negligence trial.

• After all information has been gathered and you understand your particular state’s interpretive laws regarding medical negligence, you must hire a medical malpractice attorney to facilitate your claim. Utilize all resources (the yellow pages, the Internet, word of mouth) before hiring a medical malpractice attorney.

• When an attorney is hired, develop a strategy that will give your case the best opportunity to reach a favorable settlement. The most important aspect of developing a strong case is the obtainment of information and evidence.

What is a Misdiagnosis?

• A misdiagnosis is an inaccurate diagnosis of a medical ailment. Medical professionals can misdiagnose an individual depending on a number of factors; however, in most instances a misdiagnosis is delivered through a negligent action taken by the medical provider or physician. An erroneous diagnosis can take on a number of forms—sometimes a medical problem is identified when the patient has no such ailments, or a diagnosis can be classified incorrectly. Examples of the latter include a doctor who diagnoses a tumor as benign when it is in fact malignant.

• A misdiagnosis is a medical error, and although it may be difficult to gauge given varying symptoms or the presence of inaccurate statistics, all forms of misdiagnoses will portray some form of externalities or adverse side effect.
 

Contact a medical-malpractice-lawyer to acquire legal advice and assistance.

Reasons for a Misdiagnosis?

• There are a number of reasons that will cause a misdiagnosis. People often times blame negligent actions or laziness for an inaccurate diagnosis; however, a misdiagnosis can arise for a number of medical reasons. That being said, the presence of a misdiagnosis may award an individual the right to file a medical malpractice suit.

• Reasons that would not necessitate or warrant a medical malpractice suit for a misdiagnosis include: faulty or malfunctioning medical equipment, a patient’s discretion to conceal critical information, a language barrier between the medical professional and the patient, or a situation in which the symptoms of the ailment did not match the universal diagnosis.

• Reasons that would necessitate or warrant a medical malpractice suit for a misdiagnosis: a negligent action taken by a doctor, a failure to adhere to the code of conduct necessary for all doctors to abide by, or a blatant wrongdoing that stems from laziness or the doctor’s inability to deliver a routine medical action.

Consequences of a Misdiagnosis

• The consequences of a misdiagnosis are variable; for example if a patient’s biopsied tumor is misdiagnosed as malignant when it is in fact benign, he or she will undergo unnecessary medical operations. This obviously would adversely affect the individual’s health and would invariably result in a medical malpractice suit.

• In order for the misdiagnosis to be considered malpractice, the individual must suffer a direct loss through a physical damage. Undergoing unnecessary surgery or chemotherapy will inevitably result in a negative effect in the form of unwarranted scars, sickness, and the loss of wages. These instances are grounds for medical malpractice suits; the individual will file a medical malpractice suit to obtain a recoupment for the losses suffered.

• In these instances, the individual must hire a medical malpractice attorney to facilitate their medical malpractice case. The individual must demonstrate to the local court system that the misdiagnosis directly lead to a loss in the form of finances, physical pain, or emotional distress.

Stem cell controversy

"Stem cell controversy" refers to the ethical debate over the use of embryonic stem cells in medical research. Embryonic stem cells can be harvested from fetuses, which has caused controversy and objections from some people over this type of research, frequently on religious grounds. In the United States, stem cell controversy has led to a number of laws and court challenges.

In 1995, the United States Congress passed the Dickey Amendment. This legislation prohibited the federal Department of Health and Human Services from funding any research involving the destruction of human embryos. This legislation also prohibited this department from funding the development of embryos for research purposes.

This legislation remained in effect but was amended by several other laws addressing the stem cell controversy. In 1998, the discovery of human embryonic stem cells led the Clinton administration to reconsider its stance on funding of research involving stem cells. After reviewing the issue, the administration decided that the Dickey Amendment did not prohibit research involving human embryonic stem cells provided that obtaining them did not require destroying a fetus first. After George W. Bush assumed the presidency in 2001, his administration reviewed the stem cell controversy and decided to allow federal funding involving stem cells harvested from fetuses that had already been destroyed.

In 2005, Congress passed legislation designed to permit the harvesting of stem cells from frozen embryos in the custody of in vitro fertilization clinics, provided that the donors responsible for the embryos approved. However, this legislation was vetoed by president George W. Bush. During his presidency, George W. Bush's position on the stem cell controversy led to several other bills attempting to allow more public funds for this type of research being vetoed.

In March of 2009, president Barack Obama issued an executive order removing the restrictions in the Dickey Amendment concerning federal funding using newly created human embryos. In response, a group of scientists filed a lawsuit challenging the executive order's application. The suit was led by two scientists whose work only involved the use of adult stem cells. In their lawsuit, the scientists claimed that such funding would be in direct competition with the funding they required, making it impossible for them to complete their research. In 2010, they appeared in district court before Judge Lamberth, who issued a temporary injunction prohibiting such funding on the grounds that the scientists had a strong probability of winning their lawsuit.

The stem cell controversy continued when the ruling issued by Judge Lamberth was reversed on appeal by the federal government. The government argued since since federal funding is not applied to the destruction of embryos, the executive order was not in violation of the Dickey Amendment. The appellate court ruled in favor of the Obama administration and ordered Judge Lamberth to reverse his ruling. In July of 2011, Judge Lamberth did so despite his personal objection to the finding.

On November 5, 2012, the National Institutes of Health announced that patients who receive stem cells from their own bone marrow three to seven days after a heart attack do not show greater heart function within six months.

The medical trial that looked into the treatment was called the Transplantation in Myocardial Infarction Evaluation (TIME).  The trial had similar results to a previous study performed by TIME.  The study looked into the effects of autologous stem cells, which are produced in bone marrow.  

Sonia Karlatos, Ph.D., the deputy director of NHLBI’s Division of Cardiovascular Sciences, stated: “Heart stem cell therapy research is still in its infancy, and results from early trials have varied greatly due to differences in the numbers of stem cells injected, the delivery methods used, and the compositions of the study populations.”  With the results from both of the TIME studies, Karlatos mentioned, “This standard will inform the next steps in research on the use of stem cells to repair damaged hearts.”

Researchers with TIME enrolled 120 volunteers between July 2008 and February 2011.  The average age of the participants was 57, and 87.5 percent of the participants were male.  All of the volunteers had moderate or severe blockage of the left ventricles and has received stents after heart attacks.  The volunteers were assigned to four groups:

•    group 1: injection of stem cells three days after heart attack
•    group 2: injection of placebo three days after heart attack
•    group 3: injection of stem cells seven days after heart attack
•    group 4: injection of placebo seven days after heart attack

The participants that received stem cells were injected with 150 million stem cells 8 hours after the cells were taken from the marrow.  

Even though the results were unsuccessful, CCTRN member Jay Travese, M.D., stated: “With this baseline now set, we can start to adjust some of the components of the protocol to grow and administer stem cells to find cases where the procedure may improve function.”

Source: National Institutes of Health