Medical Malpractice Cases - Prevent or Encourage Medical Errors?

[Everett Barnhill]

Do medical malpractice (misdeed) actions prevent or encourage Medical Errors?

Well it depends who you ask...

Most attorneys and plaintiffs would say that medical misdeed actions fill two needs:

1. Give an obstruction and an additional safeguard against medical mistakes; and

2. Compensate the person in question.

Hence, attorneys and plaintiffs alike would agree that medical misdeed actions serve to prevent medical errors.

However, Doctors constantly argue the opposite.

When asked the inquiry, most specialists would state that these actions:

1. Drive up the expense of medical care;

2. Have created hills of unnecessary paperwork;

3. Cause the Doctor to zero in on potential liability rather than upon the patient. Subsequently, they expect Doctors to "Cover Themselves" by ordering various expensive tests with low probability yield and more specialist evaluations. This leads to additional time spent by Doctors and patients and lower diagnostic proficiency.

4. Frequently inappropriately exclude the idea that Doctors are human, and that even in the best of circumstances, medical errors and negative results can happen, but should not be the basis for liability if legitimate care was conveyed.

Good specialists realize the results of medical mistake and therefore, "cover all the possibilities" and make sure that "no stone is unturned" in their approach to patient care. They may ask all the right inquiries, play out all the right tests, guarantee that they get and appropriately interpret all outcomes, coordinate care with other health professionals, think about all the possible diagnoses, and gauge all the risks versus all the benefits. Given this, they recommend what they accept to be the most ideal treatment.

However, as in all aspects of life, a few things may be out of hand. "It happens" at times, despite best endeavors. These unfortunate results regularly cannot be named errors at all. Nothing was fouled up, but the expected result was negative, perhaps disastrous, instead of positive.

At times in 20-20 hindsight, another approach appears as though it would not have prompted the same negative results and the idea of mistake and even malpractice is introduced by patient, another physician, attorney, and so forth However, if the physician acted as portrayed above and according to acceptable practice in his community, despite the result, there may or may not be blunder, but there is no malpractice.

Basically there are always "Different sides To The Story" and the US legal framework has its advantages and disadvantages. We invite you to discuss this division and give us your considerations and experiences. We invite patients and all professionals, health care suppliers and lawyers alike, and offer the opportunity to post websites and messages and share information with others regarding the event and prevention of medical errors.

Read More :   Personal Injury Attorney Milwaukie OR