Should i sue for malpractice

Talk to lawyers, who may have medically trained staff that can give an informed opinion, or who may have dealt with the exact same issue or doctor you are dealing with. Do whatever you can to attempt to allay any misgivings you have about your care. But take any opinions with a grain of salt. Some doctors simply won't accuse a "brother physician" of making a mistake.

Some malpractice attorneys will exaggerate the potential of your claim in an attempt to make money. Use your best discretion when seeking opinions on your treatment, but be diligent in the pursuit of information. Until you file a lawsuit, you are your own best advocate and investigator.

Medical malpractice lawsuits are expensive, time-consuming and emotionally draining affairs. They are long, drawn-out and adversarial processes that often turn ugly.

Before you decide to sue your doctor, make sure you are prepared to deal with the ensuing aggravation and potential financial ramifications. Expert witnesses, copies of medical records, deposition and witness fees, medical exams -- all of these things cost money. And if you lose your case, you could very well be on the hook for thousands or tens of thousands of dollars in expenses - depending on your legal fee agreement.

Is your case important enough to you that you feel the potential financial benefit outweighs the risk? Do you have skeletons in your closet? Are you prepared to subject yourself to hours of questioning from attorneys, both yours and likely several others?

Are you prepared to make financial disclosures that will become public? When you file a lawsuit, particularly a medical malpractice lawsuit, your life becomes a very open book -- nearly everything is fair game. The information provided on this site is not legal advice, does not constitute a lawyer referral service, and no attorney-client or confidential relationship is or will be formed by use of the site. Therefore, if they make a mistake the hospital is usually not liable for their actions.

Does that mean that if a doctor is negligent while treating you in a hospital that you have no recourse? No, you can always sue the doctor directly for medical malpractice. While most doctors are officially classified as independent contractors, the other people working in a hospital are employees. That includes nurses, support staff, and even maintenance people.

If you suffer harm due to negligence from a hospital employee you can sue the hospital. Hospitals are responsible for the actions of their employees. For example, if a nurse accidentally gives you the wrong medication or the wrong dose, this would be negligent if you were harmed as a result.

Since hospitals are responsible for the actions of their employees, you could sue a hospital for negligence in this instance. If you want to file a medical malpractice suit you need to prove that negligence has occurred. While we might wish it otherwise, doctors are human, and like all humans, they make mistakes.

If you want to sue a doctor for malpractice you need to show that they were negligent. Negligence means that the doctor you have seen failed to provide you with an acceptable standard of care. This is defined by how the doctor who treated you compares to other doctors who may have treated you in similar circumstances. For example, if you go to a doctor complaining of chest pains, they should immediately be concerned that it could be your heart. Now, if you go to a doctor suffering from a heart attack, and they give you an antacid and fail to check on your heart, the doctor would be considered negligent.

On the other hand, if a doctor is treating a patient who has a condition that cannot be cured, then they are not generally liable for medical malpractice. While most medical malpractice lawsuits are a result of negligence, there are also some cases when a doctor behaves in a reckless manner and could be sued as a result. For example, if a doctor performs surgery on you while they are under the influence of drugs or alcohol, this would be considered reckless behavior.

It takes some investigating to be really clear about what constitutes medical malpractice in each particular instance. Dentists, orthodontists, and oral surgeons are all held to the same standard as medical doctors in terms of being liable for negligence.

The fact that dentists and similar oral health professionals are held to the same standard as medical doctors is a good thing for patients. If a dentist makes a mistake while working on your teeth, it can have lasting effects. While many of those effects can be repaired, the cost, time spent on the repairs, and pain and suffering that a patient has to go through can be significant. With how common lawsuits are today, you might think that you can sue anyone for anything.

However, this is not the case. If you feel that you are the victim of dental malpractice then the first thing you should do is speak with a lawyer.

An experienced lawyer can look at the circumstances of your case and help assess what constitutes medical malpractice in your particular circumstance, as well as tell you if you have the grounds for a lawsuit. After filing a lawsuit you may be presented with a settlement offer. If this happens this is good news. What you have to do now is discuss the offer with your lawyer to figure out how you should proceed.

Could you get more money at a trial? Could you also lose your case and get nothing? Listen to the advice of your lawyer and let them know your expectations. Your lawyer should be able to negotiate to increase the offer. Even if you strongly suspect you were the victim of medical malpractice, getting fair compensation will be an uphill battle without a lawyer.

Almost all states require that the patient present a medical expert to discuss the appropriate medical standard of care and show how the defendant deviated from that standard. Because many malpractice cases involve patients that were already sick or injured, there is often a question of whether what the doctor did, negligent or not, actually caused the harm.

For example, if a patient dies after treatment for lung cancer, and the doctor did do something negligent, it could be hard to prove that the doctor's negligence caused the death rather than the cancer. The patient must show that it is "more likely than not" that the doctor's incompetence directly caused the injury. Usually, the patient must have a medical expert testify that the doctor's negligence caused the injury.

Even if it is clear that the doctor performed below the expected standards in his or her field, the patient can't sue for malpractice if the patient didn't suffer any harm.

Here are examples of the types of harm patients can sue for :. Learn more about the requirements of a medical malpractice claim. A wide variety of situations can lead to a medical malpractice claim -- from a doctor leaving a sponge in a patient's stomach during an operation to failing to tell a patient that a prescribed drug might cause heart failure.

Most medical malpractice claims fall into one of these categories:. If a competent doctor would have discovered the patient's illness or made a different diagnosis, which in turn would have led to a better outcome than the one actually achieved, then the patient may have a viable medical malpractice claim. If a doctor treats the patient in a way that no other competent doctor would, the patient could have a medical malpractice claim.

In a similar vein, it may also be malpractice if the doctor selects the appropriate treatment but administers it incompetently. Doctors have a duty to warn patients of known risks of a procedure or course of treatment -- this is known as the duty of informed consent. If a patient, once properly informed of possible risks, would have elected not to go through with the procedure, the doctor may be liable for medical malpractice if the patient is injured by the procedure in a way that the doctor should have warned could happen.

Many states have special rules and procedures for medical malpractice claims. It is important to know about these rules and follow them carefully.

In most states, you must bring a medical malpractice claim fairly quickly -- often between six months and two years, depending on the state. The time period in which you must bring the lawsuit is called the " statute of limitations.

When the time period starts ticking also depends on the state. In some states, the clock starts when the negligent act occurred; in others, it starts when the patient should have discovered the injury. Many states require the patient to first submit the claim to a malpractice review panel.

This panel of experts will hear arguments, review evidence and expert testimony, and then decide whether malpractice has occurred. The panel decision does not replace an actual medical malpractice lawsuit, and the panel cannot award damages, but it's a hoop the patient must jump through before getting to court. The findings of the review panel can be presented in court, and courts often rely on a review panel's finding of no medical malpractice to throw out a case before it goes to trial.

Some states require that the patient give the doctor notice of the malpractice claim, in the form of a basic description, before filing anything. Expert opinions are often a crucial feature of the patient's case. A qualified expert is usually required at trial. And often, expert testimony or an expert affidavit is required at the malpractice review panel proceedings prior to commencing trial.

State rules vary as to what makes somebody qualified to provide expert medical testimony , but generally it is someone with experience in the particular field at issue.