Richard Selzer said “If people understood that doctors weren’t divine, perhaps the odor of malpractice might diminish.” (n.d.). Medical malpractice and tort reform is a much debated topic and one that has not reached an equitable solution. The elements that a medical malpractice claim requires to be a valid claim will be reviewed, in addition examining the difference between a medical malpractice and negligence. Further, defenses to a medical malpractice claim will be put forth and possible thoughts to tort reform will be highlighted. Lastly, reflection upon the ideas presented will be presented.
Elements to Medical Malpractice In a medical malpractice suit, the burden of proof rests on the plaintiff. In determining if medical malpractice has befallen a plaintiff, certain aspects must be established. The first aspect to establish was a duty of care owed to an individual (Lau & Johnson, 2014). It would be safe to assume, if an individual was a patient of a specific doctor the duty of care should not be in question due to prior relationship. The second aspect is to prove, was that duty of care breached (Lau & Johnson, 2014). Meaning did the doctor’s care or a service not meet or was not at a certain standard given the doctors position. …show more content…
An actual court defenses against malpractice is showing the care provided was within the standard of care held by the medical profession (Lau & Johnson, 2014). How is standard of care decided? In a focus group of physicians and attorneys, the group determined that it should be based on what would be considered customarily done by physicians in the same circumstances (Ely, et al, 2002). The focus group tended to turn from “reasonable” as it could move into the realm of “ideal” (Ely, et al, 2002). Ideal would be what everyone thinks should happen with no outside contributing factors and can be
Elements to Medical Malpractice In a medical malpractice suit, the burden of proof rests on the plaintiff. In determining if medical malpractice has befallen a plaintiff, certain aspects must be established. The first aspect to establish was a duty of care owed to an individual (Lau & Johnson, 2014). It would be safe to assume, if an individual was a patient of a specific doctor the duty of care should not be in question due to prior relationship. The second aspect is to prove, was that duty of care breached (Lau & Johnson, 2014). Meaning did the doctor’s care or a service not meet or was not at a certain standard given the doctors position. …show more content…
An actual court defenses against malpractice is showing the care provided was within the standard of care held by the medical profession (Lau & Johnson, 2014). How is standard of care decided? In a focus group of physicians and attorneys, the group determined that it should be based on what would be considered customarily done by physicians in the same circumstances (Ely, et al, 2002). The focus group tended to turn from “reasonable” as it could move into the realm of “ideal” (Ely, et al, 2002). Ideal would be what everyone thinks should happen with no outside contributing factors and can be