I was told that I had asthma and was put on inhalers for my asthma I continue to get weak and tired and shortness of breath and decided to go back to the Doctor Who then gave me a chest x-ray and put me on more inhalers and told me that he sure it's just I have asthma, I continue taking the inhaler but never getting any better for about a month and there was no improvements, I decided to give Dr. one more chance and hopefully he would see something different because now I was experiencing gurgling in my chest he shored me that there was nothing wrong and that I didn't have pneumonia it was asthma , that same night I woke up where I could not breathe and had to be rushed to the emergency room where they are I found out I had fluid on my heart as well as in my lungs and was rushed to a hospital that specialize in congestive heart failure. I was then told by the doctors at the hospital that not only did I have congestive heart failure the left side of my heart is very weak and is only pumping at 10% and should be 60% . I know that if I had gone a couple more days using a inhaler for asthma then I did not have I would not be alive today is this a case of misdiagnos
No one is infallible however, where a person has a life his/her hands it is expected that they will do all that is require according to the standards expected to have little or no errors. It is on that basis that a person can sue for misdiagnosis because the medical practitioner showed some level of incompetence which is unacceptable. A person can sue the doctor and the hospital if the doctor is an employee of the hospital.
Malpractice lawyers decline cases because potential compensation doesn’t justify legal costs, Knutsen says. It only makes sense to accept “high-value cases,” meaning those with potentially big claims. The decision rests on the “entirely distasteful” exercise of calculating the value of a life. “It’s cheaper to kill someone than to maim them. In our legal system, as long as you are alive, you have a claim for income loss and pain and suffering. If you’re dead, those claims expire,” Knutsen says.
Delayed diagnosis of cancer is one of the most common types of delayed diagnosis cases. Unfortunately, this occurs a lot more than it should. When considering suing their doctor for delayed diagnosis of cancer, plaintiffs must consider the fact that they already had cancer when the negligence occurred. It is this very pre-existing cancer which gives rise to the possibility of a case – the cancer was there to be diagnosed, and that opportunity was lost
Since the law in Tennessee leaves room for a judge or jury’s interpretation of what might constitute emotional stress, it is important for an attorney to help you gather the right evidence or expert testimony to make a persuasive case. An attorney with the Law Offices of Ogle, Elrod & Baril, PLLC can help. Call 865-546-1111 today to arrange a free consultation.
If you have been the victim of medical malpractice, you may wish to file a formal claim with the offending doctor’s insurance company. Certainly, the doctor may be unwilling to provide you with insurance information, or you may require the assistance of an attorney to make a claim, but in some jurisdictions (particularly those without damage caps) you may find that an insurance company is willing to negotiate a settlement prior to a formal suit being filed. The expense and potential fallout of a formal, public lawsuit is a risk insurance companies are often unwilling to take.
Tennessee used to require plaintiffs to prove physical effects from the stress in order to receive compensation. But in this case, the court outlined a more nuanced set of criteria for determining emotional distress. The ruling listed six factors for consideration when deciding to award damages for the intentional or negligent infliction of emotional stress:
The doctor was negligent. Just because you are unhappy with your treatment or results does not mean the doctor is liable for medical malpractice. The doctor must have been negligent in connection with your diagnosis or treatment. To sue for malpractice, you must be able to show that the doctor caused you harm in a way that a competent doctor, under the same circumstances, would not have. The doctor's care is not required to be the best possible, but simply "reasonably skillful and careful." Whether the doctor was reasonably skillful and careful is often at the heart of a medical malpractice claim. Almost all states require that the patient present a medical expert to discuss the appropriate medical standard of care and show how the defendant deviated from that standard.
In the past, a lawyer acting for a wronged patient might have advised his or her client first to report the matter to the Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA), the professional body mandated to register health professionals and ensure practitioners are fit to practise, before proceeding with a civil case in the courts. Even though the HPCSA does not have the power to arbitrate on compensation, the rationale was that an HPCSA ruling and censure of the doctors concerned would improve the chances of a patient succeeding in a civil case.
Doctor's surgeries also have a legal duty to provide an acceptable level of care to their patients. This will take into consideration issues such as waiting times, diagnoses and administration. If the surgery fails to reach the standards reasonably expected of the medical profession, and this directly harms their patients, the doctor's surgery will have been negligent.
Most people know that if a hospital makes a mistake that hurts them, they can sue the doctor or nurse or hospital in state court under state medical malpractice/ negligence laws. What most people, including many lawyers and doctors do not know is that you can also sue hospitals for failure to evaluate and/ or stabilize a medical condition that causes harm to the patient under a federal statute. The statute is commonly referred to as the Emergency Medical Treatment & Labor Act (EMTALA).
I may not live long enough to see minor children gain the same rights that adults have to sue for outrageous instances of extreme emotional abuse (and physical abuse, and sexual abuse) but I hope that some day minor children WILL be given the right to sue their parents for ghastly instances of child abuse (such as sexual molestation), emotional abuse, and skin-crawling incidents of child neglect and child exploitation.
Such awards may follow in house insurance guidelines with some leeway granted to adjusters to adjust the claim in order to prevent the claim from being fully litigated in court. There is a wide range of levels of compensation which may fluctuate seasonally and with the economy and dictates of the insurance industry setting the varying levels of compensation to claimants. Some insurers have experimented with using computers which tabulate the data that is presented and grant the adjuster a level of money authority for which to settle the claim.
Many people mistakenly choose to file medical malpractice lawsuits because they are unhappy with the results of their treatment. However, a poor result -- even death -- does not always equate to malpractice. Medicine is an inexact science. Even the most routine procedure can result in complications both foreseen and unforeseen. There are no guarantees that any treatment, no matter how commonplace, will be successful. As such, it is possible -- and even common when it comes to some procedures -- for doctors to do everything right and still fail to obtain a good result.