There are two primary and different types of wrongs addressed in our court system: criminal wrongs and civil wrongs. Criminal wrongs are offenses punished by the public; civil wrongs are offences from one individual to another and are commenced by the victim himself/herself. Civil wrongs are redressed by awarding monetary compensation to the complaining party.
Experienced medical malpractice attorneys understand how the civil justice system is complex and confusing to many people. You should understand that medical negligence is a civil wrong for which the law provides a remedy and suits founded in medical malpractice are commenced by the victim filing the necessary paperwork with the appropriate county clerk, naming the medical professional as the defendant.
There are many different types of civil wrongs, and wrongful harm caused by a medical professional is a form of negligence. As you know, it is called medical malpractice. A successful claim against a negligent medical professional will require a patient-plaintiff to prove that a doctor-patient relationship existed along with four essential elements.
It seems obvious, but it must be said that in order for a doctor to be held accountable for a patient’s harm, he must have first been charged with that patient’s care. Once charged with that care, the medical professional must address the patient’s medical needs in accordance with the standards of the profession so that unnecessary harm does not come to the patient.
It may sound a bit general, and vague. That is because this is just a general definition of the duty. And the duty will be different for each doctor and will depend on the where in the state/country the doctor practices. Therefore, the duty will be explained to the jury at trial. A medical expert will explain what the defendant-doctor should have done in treating the patient. The expert will then testify as to whether he would have done the same thing as did the defendant if faced with the same circumstances.
Once there is proof of a deviation from the standard of care, then the experienced medical malpractice attorney will prove that said deviation is what actually caused the plaintiff’s subsequent injury. Proximate causation is how lawyers refer to it. What it means is that the plaintiff’s injury must be the direct, natural, and probable consequences extending from the medical professional’s breach of care.
Lastly, there must be proof given to the jury showing that the plaintiff actually suffered a loss. It is basic; a civil suit is commenced so that the plaintiff can have some type of loss restored to him/her. If there is nothing to restore, then there is nothing that the jury can give to the plaintiff.
But what do you think? I would love to hear from you! Leave a comment or I also welcome your phone call on my toll-free cell at 1-866-889-6882 or you can drop me an e-mail at [email protected] You are always welcome to request my FREE book, The Seven Deadly Mistakes of Malpractice Victims, at the home page of my website at www.protectingpatientrights.com.