We certainly need to commit more money to the NHS for both medics and facilities. I think the existing facilities could probably absorb several thousand more doctors, nurses and other specialists if such people were available, but at the same time we need to start another major hospital building programme [as well as specialist units to take the pressure off general hospitals]. Additional resources for psychiatric conditions are also vital as failure there impacts on other medical services. It’s no good building hospitals until we have an adequate pipeline of professionals to staff them so training needs to be boosted. If all this was authorised now it would be at least seven years before we had the first new fully-staffed hospital. There is no time to waste while we argue over where any Brexit dividend will be used. We need a commitment now.

Some state courts still use the Frye test that relies on scientific consensus to assess the admissibility of novel scientific evidence. Daubert expressly rejected the earlier federal rule's incorporation of the Frye test. (Daubert, 509 U.S. at 593-594) Expert testimony that would have passed the Frye test is now excluded under the more stringent requirements of Federal Rules of Evidence as construed by Daubert.
Arizona lawmakers in 2012 passed a similar bill to prohibit wrongful birth lawsuits, though the legislation included exceptions in cases of an “intentional or grossly negligent act or omission.” Arizona State Sen. Nancy Barto (R-Phoenix) introduced the bill because she claimed wrongful birth lawsuits negatively affect children with disabilities. “True malpractice suits,” Barto said, would be allowed to proceed.
In California, for example, recovery for non-economic damages are limited to $250,000. According to the Supreme Court of California, "noneconomic damages compensate the plaintiff for 'pain, suffering, inconvenience, physical impairment, disfigurement and other nonpecuniary damage [as per Cal.Civ.Code section 3333.2, subdivision (a)].' Section 1431.2, subdivision (b)(2) similarly defines noneconomic damages as 'subjective, non-monetary losses including, but not limited to, pain, suffering, inconvenience, mental suffering, emotional distress, loss of society and companionship, loss of consortium, injury to reputation and humiliation.'”[41] Tort reform supporters argue that states have enacted such laws in order to keep health care costs low, in addition to helping curb medical malpractice litigation. However, according to the Supreme Court of California, the state's non-economic damages caps are "not a legislative attempt to estimate the true damages suffered by plaintiffs, but rather an attempt to control and reduce medical malpractice insurance costs by placing a predictable, uniform limit on the defendant's liability for noneconomic damages."[42]
This list is not exhaustive. Nor is every item on the list a malpractice lawsuit per se. Recall the four elements above. For a psychiatrist to be liable for malpractice, he or she must have failed to take reasonable care, and the patient must have suffered injury as a result. A doctor can take reasonable care and still make an incorrect judgment call, so not every incorrect decision is actionable as malpractice. However, some items on the list—for example, engaging in a sexual relationship with a patient—almost always lead to prevailing malpractice claims.
Medical malpractice occurs when a patient is harmed by a doctor (or other medical professional) who fails to competently perform his or her medical duties. The rules about medical malpractice -- from when you must bring your lawsuit to whether you must notify the doctor ahead of time -- vary from state to state. But there are some general principals and broad categories of rules that apply to most medical malpractice cases. Here's an overview of the law and some of these special rules.
What she did NOT DO – WEAN THE DOSE OF FENTANYL PATCHES DOWN FIRST…. This was a COLD SWITCH – and being a “legitimate patient” I never assumed a doctor would ever – ever do this without some significant discussion, the audacity of a doctor to do this – knowing the impact, and knowing I have a job and a family (twins and 3 older children) and that ALL of the discussion with this doctor was centered around NOT causing a negative impact to work / family life – is just impressive to say the least…
With the exception of a small minority of cases, the Florida medical malpractice statute of limitations is a hard and fast rule. Consequently, if you fail to file a claim or lawsuit for medical malpractice within the allotted time frame, you will be precluded from ever seeking monetary damages in your case. If you suspect that you sustained an injury or illness as a result of doctor negligence, you should contact the medical malpractice lawyers at Dolman Law Group as soon as possible.
"Many cases of psychiatric malpractice are never reported because the victims are already emotionally unstable." With that sentence alone, the author condemns anyone with a valid complaint who has visited a psychiatrist even one time for simple, passing, stress-related difficulties, to risking even more by challenging perhaps the most elusive, powerful professional in existence.
The stakes grew higher as damage awards grew exponentially and kept in pace with inflation. Birth injury malpractice cases between widespread as the link between blatant physician error and cerebral palsy became clear. Five of the ten highest paid claims of all time were cerebral palsy suits, for which the plaintiffs won multimillion dollar awards. Plaintiffs became entitled to both economic and noneconomic losses. Economic losses are the quantifiable monetary losses associated with the injury incurred by the defendant's negligence. Noneconomic damages are the unquantifiable emotional losses for pain, suffering and loss of enjoyment of life among other emotional hardships. As juries began to award substantial damages to injured plaintiffs, liability insurance for physicians increased. Physicians and other medical professionals passed these costs along to patients, resulting in higher costs for healthcare. Accessibility to health care was then directly affected by medical malpractice litigation. Throughout the latter half of the 20th century, many states introduced medical malpractice reform acts. Battling the question of whether to favor plaintiff or defendant, states began to impose what is known “damage caps,” which very widely between each state. Damage caps limit the amount of money a plaintiff can collect should they win their malpractice case. Some states impose no limit at all because such limitations are constitutionally prohibited. Other states have taken a long, hard look at the question of damage caps, assessing what numerical figure does not deprive the plaintiff of rightful compensation and is not unjustly punitive to the defendant. The lowest caps sit in the neighborhood $250,000, while the highest caps are in the neighborhood of $2.5 million. A handful of states adopted the use of a medical malpractice fund, to which all physicians in that state must contribute. The fund will pay damages in medical malpractice claims after the physician's insurance covers the first $1 million. This way, physicians need only insurance that covers up to $1 million dollars and no more. This is meant to bring down insurance premiums for medical professionals. To a minor extent, damage caps influence the state a medical professional will choose to practice in, although it is not a huge bearing in their decision. Some states allow for punitive damages, which must be paid by the defendant as punishment but which are not awarded to the plaintiff.
There are any number of scenarios under which a physician can be negligent. Keep in mind that in the examples above -- and in every other case -- it is incumbent upon you to prove that your physician breached his duty to practice according to the standard of care, and that breach caused you harm. See What You Need to Prove to learn about the key legal pieces you and your attorney would need to put together.

A case can be opened only if the alleged malpractice happened less than three years previously. There are a few exceptions to this general rule. If the injured party was under 18 at the time of the incident and his or her parents failed to seek compensation on behalf of the child, on turning 18, the child has one year to seek compensation on his or her own account. An injured party suffering from a mental illness has three years to make a claim on recovery from this illness. Exceptions might also be made if the injured party was compelled to be outside South Africa during the three-year intervening period.
It is not easy to get a full picture of the increase in medical malpractice cases in South Africa, as there is no central register. Cases can be settled in court, out of court or via mediation. If matters are settled out of court or via mediation, there is no public record of compensation. However, if all sources of information are collated, it would certainly appear that both the number and levels of claims are increasing, and this is affecting the overall cost of health care in the country, including what you pay for medical scheme cover.
Here is the step most people don’t realize. If the patient’s lawyer wants to take the case further, they need to get an expert witness. That will cost them a lot of money. So if the case is weak, they will do some sort of calculation. For example, they will say they spent 50 hours so far, and they want to make 10,000 for that, so they will offer to dismiss the case for 20,000, which they will split with the patient. Many cases will settle at this point, because it’s easier to spend a little money and avoid the massive costs of going to court, as well as avoiding the risk of a big payout to the patient. This is the reason I say it’s easy to sue a doctor for malpractice, lose the case, but still make some money.
We offer a completely free, no obligation Medical Negligence Claim Assessment. We understand that suing your GP may not be an easy decision so we are here to help and advise you. We will take the time to listen to your complaint, and then explain whether you can sue a doctor, how long it might take, how you can fund the claim and how much compensation you might receive.
In states using this second standard, courts ask whether a normal patient, with the same medical history and conditions as the plaintiff, would have changed his or her mind about the treatment if the risk was disclosed. Unlike states following the first standard, a doctor must also inform a patient of realistic alternative treatments, even if the doctor only recommends one treatment.
Other states require that you file an "affidavit of merit" (or a similarly-named document) with the court when you first begin the lawsuit. This is a sworn statement from a qualified medical expert testifying that you appear to have a valid case for medical malpractice. Once again, if you don’t provide the expert affidavit at the beginning of the case, the court will throw the lawsuit out. Depending on the state, there might be either a screening panel or an expert affidavit requirement or both or other similar requirements.
×