Victim of Medical Wrongdoing?

How many hoops should you have to jump through to get justice? It's a fair question that many people struggle with. The CEO of a Georgia medical services company suggests - in an opinion piece submitted to a Georgia newspaper - that to be sure that Georgians who have been harmed by negligent medical care are worthy of justice we should subject them to one more hoop. Not coincidentally, it's a hoop that benefits only medical professionals and insurance companies - the only two interest groups that profit when injured patients are prevented from securing justice.

What the author of the opinion has proposed is that, instead of allowing victims of medical malpractice the same Constitutional Right to Trial by Jury enjoyed by all other Georgians, people harmed by medical wrongdoing/malpractice would have to get permission to have a jury trial from a "screening panel" comprised of members of the medical and insurance industries, the same industries that want to avoid compensating injured patients. This approach is wrong and adds an unnecessary, ineffective layer to our civil justice system

The fact is all medical malpractice cases brought in Georgia have already been through multiple screening hoops. The first hoop is that you have to have had something very bad happen as a result of malpractice. Your next hoop is that you have to find a lawyer willing and able to take your case. That lawyer will tell you that there is another, special hoop that protects only professionals charged with negligence. In order to pass through that hoop, the patient must find a medical professional willing to publicly criticize their colleague and sign a document swearing that malpractice happened. So far your case has been screened three times: Something bad happens. You find a lawyer who will invest in helping you find justice. And, you find another doctor who agrees that there was malpractice and is willing to say so. Then there's a fourth screening before you can have a jury hear your case: the judge must screen the case, too.

Our Founding Fathers created the world's best independent screening panels when they imbedded the right to a trial by jury in our Constitution. You are entitled to a jury of your peers, not a two step process, the first of which is a trial by jury of the defendant's colleagues. We trust the people of our communities to fairly resolve our disputes when we are unable to resolve them ourselves.

The CEO cites an approach tried in Maine as being the right fit for us here in Georgia. He fails to mention that this approach is regularly criticized by the Supreme Court of Maine as being inadequate and harmful to the people of Maine. He cites, as a reason for needing "screening panels," a Georgia case involving a plastic surgeon who carelessly destroyed the blood supply to a woman's face and left her horribly disfigured. He suggests that this woman - who was horribly injured through no fault of her own and who successfully navigated all of the legal hurdles to hold the wrongdoer accountable for herself and other patients - has not done enough. He says she needs to clear yet another hurdle to prove herself worthy of a jury trial. The suggestion is outrageous and it serves no purpose but to deny those who have been harmed their fair measure of justice.

Why should patients who have been harmed by medical malpractice have to go through two trials when everyone else only has to go through one? Why should medical professionals get special treatment? It's a question with an obvious answer: They shouldn't.

Safety of Gastric Banding Weight-Loss Surgery in Question   Anesthetics at the Dentist   Dental Malpractice   What Is Medical Negligence and What Does It Mean for You?   

Medical Malpractice Part II

Medical malpractice cases can be tragic because the patient is placing their complete trust in their healthcare provider, but nevertheless, these cases do occur at astonishingly high rates.

Since there are so many variables in a medical malpractice case, it is important for the plaintiff-the patient who was injured-to understand the process of the trial.

Similar to other tort cases, the plaintiff along with their attorney will file the lawsuit where proper jurisdiction exists in a court. From the point the case is filed and during the entirety of the trial, both the defendant and the plaintiff must share information they acquire during the time. This information includes the depositions, interrogatories and requests for documents.

Based on negotiated terms from both the defendant and plaintiff, the case can be settled on a pre-trial. However, if no settlement can be reached, then the case must continue in trial.

The plaintiff must have sufficient evidence, or the burden of proof, which proves the preponderance of the evidence provided. Both the plaintiff and the defendant will present experts to testify during the trial to attest to the standards of care and other technical issues required.

Either the judge or jury must then evaluate all of the provided evidence. From there, they must determine which side has a more credible case.

A verdict will then be rendered for whichever party prevails during the trial. If the plaintiff wins the trial, the jury or judge will then decide what damages will be compensated. The losing party is free to ask for a re-trial.

If for whatever reason a plaintiff who is dissatisfied with the results of a trial motions for additional re-trials and still is unhappy, they may move to additur.

If a defendant is unhappy with a judgement, they may move for a remittitur. Either the plaintiff or the defendant may take an appeal from the judgement.

Expert testimony is a vital aspect of a successful medical malpractice case which goes to trial. The witnesses must be court-qualified, based on legal precedence, which includes expert qualifications and standards.

An expert witness must be a specialist in the area to be considered. Simply having a degree on a topic is not sufficient enough. Criteria must be met for the sake of reliability.

There are two important cases which act as models for determining whether a witness is qualified.

If proper evidence is collected, then a person who is victimized certainly should seek out a well-qualified attorney to represent them.

Safety of Gastric Banding Weight-Loss Surgery in Question   Anesthetics at the Dentist   Dental Malpractice   Why Should You Consult With an Erb's Palsy Attorney?   Why the Fear of a Malpractice Lawsuit May Be Causing Malpractice   

What Does It Take to Win a Medical Malpractice Case? "The Big Picture"

Ask any experienced plaintiff's personal injury trial attorney which cases are the hardest to win and the universal answer will be medical malpractice. These cases include:

Medical Malpractice Birth Injury Nursing Home Malpractice Brain Injury Spinal Cord Injury Wrongful Death

From the moment the case begins, the attorney knows that he or she is in for a battle. When sued, medical doctors immediately fall into a state of denial if not righteous indignation. How could they possibly be responsible for a patient's injury or death? Medical malpractice insurance companies further empower physicians by granting them the absolute right to have their case tried to verdict before a jury, no matter how egregious their conduct.

The plaintiffs' attorney is also faced with the mandatory requirement of retaining a physician in the same specialty to testify against the defendant doctor. At one time this task was extremely difficult, especially on a local level, as the testifying doctor feared retribution from the medical community and the malpractice insurance companies. In fact, for a period of time one major insurance company sent notices to its insured's "encouraging" (sic) them to not testify for plaintiffs' in malpractice cases. However, as doctors incomes have continued to decline due to lower PPO and Medicare reimbursements, many have welcomed the opportunity to increase their incomes by testifying against their colleagues as expert witnesses. These physicians charge plaintiffs' attorneys from $5,000-$10,000 to review records sit for a deposition and testify at trial.

The typical defense in malpractice cases is that any and all mistakes have resulted from "a known complication". Taken to its extreme just about anything can be labeled "a know complication". Defense attorneys refer to medicine as an "art" which is not perfect. Using this logic the same can be said for the negligent operation of a motor vehicle which is never excused by the law.

My many years as a Chicago personal injury attorney has taught me that juries will give a doctor every benefit of the doubt before finding their conduct negligent and awarding a patient money damages. During the selection process prospective jurors are asked if both the plaintiff and defendant start out on equal footing before the case begins. No matter what a juror may say the doctor has a clear edge over the plaintiff. The physician is typically placed on a pedestal representing the pinnacle of all professions. This attitude is exacerbated by the medical lobby and their insurance companies flooding the media with the "cry" that, "there are too many lawsuits brought against doctors", that "doctors are being chased out of their state" and "there will be no one available to deliver babies". Jurors are therefore brainwashed to believe these untruths.

Given the foregoing prevailing attitudes, I submit that unless a plaintiff's personal injury attorney can get a jury "mad" or upset at the doctor over their conduct in the case on trial the plaintiff will lose. This is true no matter how technically correct the plaintiff's position may be. Young, inexperienced plaintiffs' medical malpractice attorneys forget who they are trying their case in front of and fall into the trap of asserting a technical position in an effort to win the case. If they use this tactic their case is doomed. Jurors' already brainwashed, lack the knowledge, patience and desire to absorb technical medical jargon. Defense attorneys' spoon feed as much of this information as they can to confuse jurors into a verdict for the defendant doctor.

The "Big Picture" is the only solution. Each side presents expert witnesses as required by applicable law. The witnesses offset each other's testimony, so who is the jury to believe? The plaintiff's attorney must shift the argument away from both witnesses labeling them a legal necessity and win the case upon common sense, lay facts that can always be found in the medical records or non medical testimony. Jurors can easily absorb this type of evidence, forget (as they will anyway) the technical medical testimony and side with the plaintiff. Examples of this technique include showing the jury that the doctor was too lazy or pompous to make a telephone call to the patient, hospital resident or even a nurse; that the doctor did not visit the patient in the hospital or went off on vacation; that the patient was left in the hands of an inexperienced intern or resident physician or the physician may have left the operating room prior to the completion of a surgical procedure.

Physicians often know that they have committed malpractice at a moment in time. Their typical reflex reaction is to write a detailed "cover your ass" entry in the patients chart in an effort to absolve themselves of the mistake. This may be followed with yet another writing called a "post entry" note. The trial attorney must use these physicians "progress notes" to show the jury that the physician knew that he or she made the mistake and went to painstaking lengths to cover it up. What the physician actually wrote in the chart is of little import since they have shown a guilty state of mind. Discrediting their conduct is the goal. Get the jury mad at the doctor!

Inexperienced attorneys having watched too many television legal dramas will do everything possible to catch the doctor in an outright lie. Although this is certainly a desirable goal, a failed effort will inflame the jury against the plaintiff. A better technique is to let the physician or their expert witness make incredible claims which are preposterous even to a lay person. Said another way, the doctors testimony on many critical issues may make perfect sense to a jury causing the plaintiffs' case to suffer. If left alone at this stage the plaintiffs case may be lost. Yet, my 35 years of medical malpractice experience has shown me that physicians do not know when to stop. After effectively hurting the plaintiffs' case they come forward with a single self serving statement or opinion that is "over the top". Once made, the physician has taken away all of the good will established with the jury and brought all of their testimony into question. The plaintiffs' attorney must then argue this fact to the jury during closing argument, effectively taking that witness out of the case. Even though the doctor did not admit fault he might as well have done so.

Once the plaintiffs' medical practice attorney abandons the "he said / she said" technique and masters the art of selling the "Big Picture," they will be on their way to successfully winning medical malpractice cases.

Safety of Gastric Banding Weight-Loss Surgery in Question   Anesthetics at the Dentist   Dental Malpractice   The Future of Obamacare After Oral Arguments   Have You Acquired Hepatitis?   

How Much Does an Asbestos Lawyer Cost?

Asbestos exposure can be the cause of serious illnesses such as mesothelioma and asbestosis. These diseases are caused by the occupational exposure to the toxic mineral. People who work in factories and mines are likely to develop these illnesses. The directors of the factories or manufacturers are responsible for the loss and suffering the person suffers when he develops mesothelioma. They know about the cancerous effects of the mineral and very often they don't even warn their workers about it. In general special clothing and equipment should be used by people who are in direct contact with the mineral. But sometimes these rules are not preserved. Thus, people become the victims of asbestos exposure. These people have the right to get compensation for their loss and suffering. They hire asbestos lawyers who take asbestosis legal actions and fight for their client's rights.

But how much does an asbestos lawyer cost? It is worth mentioning that the costs vary from one lawyer to another. This is conditioned by different factors. First of all the experience plays a great role. The more experienced the lawyer is the higher the costs of his services are. It is natural, that if the lawyer has won many cases the cost for his services will be higher. Another factor is the reputation. Reputation is important in any aspect and here it also plays an important role.

Thus it is impossible to say exactly how much an asbestos lawyer costs, since the costs vary from country to country.

Safety of Gastric Banding Weight-Loss Surgery in Question   Anesthetics at the Dentist   Dental Malpractice   Nursing Care Malpractice (Part I)   

Record Keeping Negligence in Hospitals

When you are in the hospital being treated for an illness or injury, maintaining and updating your medical history is an important part of your treatment. Doctors, nurses, and other staff should continually update your medical records so that your most current treatments are noted and any other medical professionals who look at your records will know what treatment you have been given and what you still need. Usually, patients do not know every detail of their medical history, which is why record keeping is so important.

If you feel that a medical professional was negligent in maintaining your medical records, it is best to speak with an attorney about the details of your case. You deserve to know your legal rights and options if medical malpractice played a part in your injuries.

Damage from Record Keeping Negligence

Many malpractice cases go to court and a percentage of these involve negligent record keeping. If a medical professional has been negligent in updating or managing your medical records, you could suffer from any of the following consequences:

Treatments that are given too late Being given the wrong medication or medication in the wrong dosages Being provided with food or medication that you are allergic to

You should not have to worry that hospital or clinic staff members have not updated your medical records like they should. Any mistakes or information they leave out could potentially cause you harm or injury. Speak with an experienced medical malpractice attorney to discuss your situation and the potential merits of a medical malpractice case as soon as possible.

Safety of Gastric Banding Weight-Loss Surgery in Question   Anesthetics at the Dentist   Dental Malpractice   The Dangers of Delayed Diagnosis   Should I Sue My Doctor?   

Aphasia and Medical Malpractice

Medical malpractice is a serious concern in cases of brain damage. Although the original cause for a problem such as a stroke may be due to an individual's deteriorating health or another external factor, a physician's mistaken intervention or lack of care can worsen damage that should be manageable by health care professionals. In particular, disorders such as aphasia may actually be the fault of an attending physician, as a medical mistake can increase the amount of damage to the brain.

Aphasia is caused by the death of brain cells and tissue within certain areas. If the brain is either injured through physical trauma or a lack of oxygen, the specific areas necessary to maintain language use can become damaged. While it is not necessarily true that all brain injuries will result in such localized damage, it is common for issues such as brain hemorrhaging or stroke to cause damage leading to aphasia.

In the case of a stroke, a physician can worsen a situation if they do not attend to a patient's needs quickly and effectively. Obviously, undiagnosed strokes can go on to damage the brain substantially. Without quick treatment, rehabilitation and cognitive therapy is significantly more difficult and tends to yield much less successful results. If a physician misdiagnoses a stroke, they may mistake a stroke caused by a hemorrhage for a stroke caused by a blood clot. Considering that treatments for blood clot-caused strokes can actually worsen brain hemorrhaging, this can be an extremely dangerous problem.

Other issues can also contribute to the development of aphasia. If a brain hemorrhage is left untreated, the results can be significant brain damage. Additionally, a poorly performed brain surgery may leave certain areas of the brain without necessary blood or oxygen for a significant amount of time or may cause physical injury to the brain.

To learn more about how malpractice can influence the development of aphasia, contact a medical malpractice lawyer.

Safety of Gastric Banding Weight-Loss Surgery in Question   Anesthetics at the Dentist   Dental Malpractice   The Dangers of Delayed Diagnosis