The basic principle of conducting lawsuits related to medical negligence lies in an approach to doctors activity investigation, which reduces the demand to just ‘know what you’re doing’. Lack of professional management of a claim for medical negligence can lead to undesirable results – a complete rejection, or only partial coverage of the damage. Lack of understanding of the description and documentation of the medical case, a wrong choice of a specialist doctor for medical examination, lack of proper instructions from the doctor, and even a recommendation from a lawyer to file a lawsuit that has no chance of being satisfied – all these factors can nullify your efforts. So let us share the insights we get from medical negligence solicitors experts we are getting in touch with on a regular basis.
To take a doctor in the act is not the best option
In the conduct of medical negligence cases, it is important to understand that the task of the lawyer is not ‘catch’ the doctors on their oversight to justify the requested compensation. Doctors have to take complex and urgent decisions, and they can not be sure they are 100% right. So sometimes they make mistakes, like the rest of people every day, but sometimes these mistakes are the result of medical negligence. In this case, the patient has the right to get a compensation for physical and moral damage. (more…)
The term ‘diagnostic process’, according to many of doctors, impoverishes the entire range of problems faced by the patient at the very beginning of the conversation with the doctor. Seasoned experts say that making a diagnosis is a creative process, as a rule, does not fit into the standard scheme. As there are no two identical doctors, and no two patients with identical conditions and problems, the spectrum of diagnostic methods aimed at figuring out the clinical picture in patients suffering from certain nosological forms of the disease is very wide in experienced, qualified and truly professional doctors (in young doctors, this spectrum is more narrow, but it could be more schematic).
Despite the fact that healing – is not so much a craft as an art of action by the doctor the term ‘diagnostic technology’ is oftentimes used in regard to diagnostic process as the work of a conveyor for the production of diagnostic services, at the inlet of which an unknown object is supplied, while on the output this image is filled with volume and content. The technological approach allows the physician to present architecture of the affected organs and systems of the patient causal connection between the relationship of the disease and impaired function of complex biological systems in the patient. This approach is also oftentimes used in legal practice according to Steve Duarte, medical negligence solicitors representative with years of experience under the betl. (more…)
State regulation of medical practice was outlined in Rome. The provisions of the Roman law, the boundary between the reckless and deliberate actions of doctors gradually began to be reflected in the criminal laws of the countries of Western Europe. In the Middle Ages period, the Catholic Church has detained the development of medicine and law, the liability for the failure of healing solved, first of all, from the standpoint of violation of theological dogmas. Institute of mistakes over the years is deeply studied by experts in the field of criminal law. Standards of error contained in the criminal law of certain foreign countries, such as Argentina, Spain, Poland, the USA, France and etc.
Differentiation of intent and error are gradually reflected in the laws of all European countries, although the question of their liability was solved differently. In Germany and Austria the responsibility of the doctor for his professional shortcomings is viewed from the perspective of the private relationship between the doctor and the patient. Criminal liability for the mistakes of doctors is almost completely absent, but they face many civil lawsuits. Establishing a causal link between the fault of the doctor and the harm is the plaintiff’s prerogative. If the patient is, to some degree, is capable of finding guilt of unsatisfactory outcome of treatment, the physician’s responsibility is excluded. Current legislation of foreign countries (Austria, Germany, France) punishes only gross medical error because the relationship between doctor and patient is now recognised as private. Foreign legislation contains special provisions on the criminal liability ‘for improper medical treatment and clumsily, awkwardly carried out operation’ (you may want to get more info paragraphs as 856, 857 of the Criminal Code of Austria).
According to Art. 122-3 of the Criminal Code of France criminal liability is not initiated against the person submitting the evidence that the error made could have been avoided or shouldn’t have been manifested, the doctor was conducting his work in accordance with good practices and hence he is not responsible for the error.
In the UK, clinical negligence area is, perhaps, the most complicated against the background of European countries; this way or the other, either administrative or criminal prosecution can be initiated in such cases. The complexity and a higher demand in services result to an increase of the legal niche: according to Solicitors Guru, a large UK legal aggregator where you can find a solicitor, the number of medical negligence solicitors has risen by 12% in comparison with 2013.