26 hours ago · If a patient or family threatens litigation prior to care, during care, or after care is provided, says Stimmel, document exactly what they said in the chart. "Do not give your opinions or document subjectively," says Stimmel. "It is not helpful to a legal defense months later if your chart entry says, 'Patient seems unhappy and they might sue.' >> Go To The Portal
As a result, a patient may become angry and threaten to sue. It is an all too familiar occurrence for those who work in the healthcare field. According to Physicians Practice’s 2013 Great American Physician Survey, 15% of physicians were threatened with legal action, and nearly 35% were named in a lawsuit.
When a threat of a lawsuit is received, Greenfelder says the emergency physician should contact hospital risk management, and if he or she is a member of a group, the president of the group should be alerted. An ED nurse should contact his or her nursing supervisor, he advises.
When a patient makes an official threat, typically an internal investigation is started to determine the credibility of the claim, document pertinent facts, and assess liability. Look over your particular hospital policy procedure for documenting threats and follow accordingly.
When Doctors Sue Patients – Defamation Is Devastating, but a Lawsuit Could Make It Worse. In other words, suing for defamation might increase the damage caused by the post. This phenomenon is known as the Streisand effect. In 2003, Barbara Streisand attempted to suppress photographs of her residence appearing online.
An example of failure to give informed consent occurs when a doctor gives the patient a written consent form, but fails to explain the medical conditions or jargon the form refers to, or the risk of complication or death from a procedure.
What is an Example of Lack of Informed Consent? The most common examples of a lack of informed consent includes a physician not letting a patient know the known risks associated with the procedure.
Results. We identified four factors that could affect the relationship between malpractice litigation risk and physicians' behaviors that run counter to patient safety: complexity of care, discussing incidents with colleagues, personalized responsibility, and hospitals' response to physicians following incidents.
In both medical and legal terminology, this is called "informed consent." If a doctor does not get informed consent from a patient, and the patient is injured, the patient may have grounds to sue the doctor for medical malpractice.
There are 4 components of informed consent including decision capacity, documentation of consent, disclosure, and competency.
Informed consent is meant to honor your right to decide what's done with your body. Rules and the law pertaining to this topic have changed over the years, but one thing hasn't: Failure to obtain informed consent is a crime—medical malpractice, specifically—and the doctor can be charged with negligence and battery.
The most frequent factor is a lack of adequate communication between the physician and the patient. Patients are most likely to sue when they feel they have not been kept informed about their progress or complications.
misdiagnosisOne of the most common reasons for filing a medical malpractice lawsuit is diagnostic errors such as misdiagnosis and delayed diagnosis.
To do so, four legal elements must be proven: (1) a professional duty owed to the patient; (2) breach of such duty; (3) injury caused by the breach; and (4) resulting damages. Money damages, if awarded, typically take into account both actual economic loss and noneconomic loss, such as pain and suffering.
Within the context of medical malpractice, "gross negligence" refers to conduct so reckless or mistaken as to be virtually obvious to a person with no medical training. Examples include a surgeon amputating the wrong limb or leaving a surgical instrument inside a body cavity of the patient.
Medical negligence is substandard care that's been provided by a medical professional to a patient, which has directly caused injury or caused an existing condition to get worse. There's a number of ways that medical negligence can happen such as misdiagnosis, incorrect treatment or surgical mistakes.
Informed consentInformed consent is the type of consent that is most commonly an issue in a medical malpractice case. Before performing a medical procedure, a doctor or healthcare provider has a duty to warn the patient of the known risks involved.
It is helpful to have a witness in the room so there are two accounts of what is said. Having another person in the room can also aid in diffusing any conflict with a patient, leading to a more productive conversation.
Immediately after talking with the patient, document your conversation in a neutral and objective tone. Attorneys rely on records. If it is not written down, it doesn’t exist. The best advice an attorney can give is to chart and document thoroughly.
When a patient makes an official threat, typically an internal investigation is started to determine the credibility of the claim, document pertinent facts, and assess liability.
When a threat is first made, a gut reaction is to stop talking and leave the situation to administrators. In most situations, this would be a big mistake. Talk things over with the patient the moment a threat is made. Ask the patient why they feel a lawsuit is necessary, and what you can do to help address the issue.
Andrew Grossman/123RF.com. Most people choose a career in medicine because they enjoy caring for others. Even with the best of intentions, things can go wrong. As a result, a patient may become angry and threaten to sue. It is an all too familiar occurrence for those who work in the healthcare field. According to Physicians Practice’s 2013 Great ...
If you find yourself served with notice of a lawsuit, it is time to talk with your attorney. An attorney can help you navigate the dangerous legal waters and act as an advocate for you and your reputation. Attorneys are bound by ethics to have your best interest in mind, so their advice should not be taken lightly.
Your medical malpractice insurance should cover the cost of an attorney. Give your malpractice insurance a call to find an attorney in your area that is covered by your plan. If you have multiple attorneys from which to choose, schedule a few consultations to ensure you hire an attorney you can trust.
Stimmel says to always document conversations with the patient or family members. "It is very helpful in a trial, possibly four years later, to show the plaintiffs were demanding money immediately," she adds. If a patient or family threatens litigation prior to care, during care, or after care is provided, says Stimmel, ...
It is not uncommon for a patient or family member who is unhappy with the services he or she receives in the ED to make threatening statements about filing lawsuits, says Justin S. Greenfelder, JD, a health care attorney with Buckingham, Doolittle & Burroughs in Canton, OH.
The insurance company will ignore you and your threatening letter. Your doctor will ignore you and your letter. Your lawyer will have lost all credibility with the insurance company.
Can You Walk OUT of a Mediation Without Settling Your Medical Malpractice Case?
Before suing a doctor, you should know the statute of limitations in your state, consult a medical expert, and find an experienced lawyer.
Filing medical malpractice claims is different from filing other civil lawsuits. Here’s what to remember if you want to file a malpractice lawsuit.
When filing a malpractice suit, you have to be able to prove that medical malpractice happened. These are the requirements you have to show:
You need to prove a doctor deviated from accepted medical practices, such as prescribing the wrong therapy to leaving an instrument in the patient’s body during surgery.
An injured patient can be entitled to economic and non-economic damages, such as:
There are several steps and certain criteria you need to fulfill before suing a doctor. You have to check the legal standard in your state, get expert witnesses, and let the doctor know you intend to sue them.
In other words, suing for defamation might increase the damage caused by the post. This phenomenon is known as the Streisand effect.
And he shed over 30 pounds due to stress. As a last resort, Carlotti sued Petta for defamation. A jury listened to testimony over three weeks. They delivered an 8 figure verdict in one day.
McKee sued the son in Minnesota court. The case was thrown out on summary judgment. Truth and opinion are two defenses to allegations of defamation. The judge concluded the review contained statements of opinion, true statements, and vague statements. Accordingly, the judge ruled against the doctor.
In Carlotti v. Petta, Dr. Carlotti, a cosmetic surgeon, successfully sued his former patient – receiving a jury verdict of $12 million in December 2011. In 2007, Albert Carlotti, performed a number of procedures on Ms. Petta, a singer, including a rhinoplasty.
Dr. Jeffrey Segal, Chief Executive Officer and Founder of Medical Justice, is a board-certified neurosurgeon. Dr. Segal is a Fellow of the American College of Surgeons; the American College of Legal Medicine; and the American Association of Neurological Surgeons. He is also a member of the North American Spine Society. In the process of conceiving, funding, developing, and growing Medical Justice, Dr. Segal has established himself as one of the country’s leading authorities on medical malpractice issues, counterclaims, and internet-based assaults on reputation.
In most cases, the answer is no. First, proving defamation is not easy. To prevail, you must prove that the defendant made a false statement to another person; and the statement harmed one’s reputation. If the statement was true, you will lose. If the statement was an opinion, you will lose.
Section 230 is a federal law which makes it impossible to sue a web based platform for defamation. That said, if a doctor can identify the actual author of a defamatory post, he can sue that person. In the cases above, the doctor was able to easily identify the author.
Depending on their personal experience with guns, physicians might have varying levels of concern about or comfort with the implications of a firearm’s involvement in a given case . They might also be hesitant to question a patient further on the topic, as they might be concerned about offending the patient by asking about what many perceive to be a private issue. However, ascertaining the types of guns owned, how they are stored, and if the patient has any intentions of using them are important components of risk assessment.
For example, California Civil Code 43.92, known as the “Tarasoff statute,” requires that if a patient makes “a serious threat of physical violence against a reasonably identifiable victim” to a psychotherapist, that psychotherapist is required to take steps to protect the intended victim [18].
Mandatory reporting of persons believed to be at imminent risk for committing violence or attempting suicide can pose an ethical dilemma for physicians, who might find themselves struggling to balance various conflicting interests. Legal statutes dictate general scenarios that require mandatory reporting to supersede confidentiality requirements, but physicians must use clinical judgment to determine whether and when a particular case meets the requirement. In situations in which it is not clear whether reporting is legally required, the situation should be analyzed for its benefit to the patient and to public safety. Access to firearms can complicate these situations, as firearms are a well-established risk factor for violence and suicide yet also a sensitive topic about which physicians and patients might have strong personal beliefs.
After a painful breakup with his long-time girlfriend, Thomas struggled to get over feeling angry about his girlfriend’s decision to end their relationship. Specifically, Thomas was unable to sleep well, despite trying numerous over-the-counter sleep aids. He decided to make an appointment with Dr. B to get a prescription for something that might help.
In 1996 , the federal government passed the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act ( HIPAA) to standardize the expectations of patient confidentiality surrounding protected health information (PHI), which comprises any health care information that can be linked to a specific individual, such as diagnostic or treatment information [4]. With this increased regulation came increased sanctions for violations and physicians’ growing concerns about both their ethical and legal duties concerning confidentiality [5]. However, HIPAA’s implementing regulations describe particular exceptions in which it is appropriate to break confidentiality, particularly in circumstances when a failure to do so could result in harm to the patient or to society [6].
Amy Barnhorst, MD is an assistant clinical professor of psychiatry at the University of California, Davis, where she is also an emergency and inpatient psychiatrist who conducts violence and suicide risk assessments as part of her clinical care. She conducts research on the interface between firearm violence, suicide, and mental illness.
Despite their attempts at specificity, these laws often do not fit neatly onto real-life patient cases. In some jurisdictions, the statements made by the patient can meet the threshold at which a physician is mandated to report in order to warn or protect a potential victim.
Complaints doctors have about patients include everything from non-adherence to obnoxious behavior to missed appointments. When the complaints about one patient are just too much, a doctor may choose to terminate their relationship with that patient for any of those reasons, and for others, too.
From the provider's perspective, that means a window of no income in addition to the fact that the patient isn't getting the help they need.
Patient non-compliance ( non-adherence): When the patient fails to follow the treatment recommendations established by the doctor. (Which is why it is so important that you and your doctor make treatment decisions together .) Patient's failure to keep appointments: Patients make appointments, then cancel them at the last minute, ...
If your doctor fires you, you have a few options: If you want to go back to that doctor, you may want to attempt to repair the relationship with your doctor. This will involve knowing what the reason was that you were dismissed (which may, or may not, be apparent).
If the doctor's practice is closing: Just like the rest of us, doctors close their practices. They may sell them, or retire from practice, they may die, or just close their doors.
Doctors may not dismiss a patient in the midst of ongoing medical care, called " continuity of care.". For example, a person who is pregnant cannot be dismissed by their doctor within a few weeks of delivery. A cancer patient cannot be fired before his chemo or radiation treatments are completed.
Patient's rude or obnoxious behavior: No patient should ever be rude or obnoxious. It's a form of abuse. Just as patients should fire a doctor who behaves this way, it's fair that a doctor should fire a patient for such poor behavior, too.
A physician-patient relationship can be properly terminated in the following ways: 1 The physician and the patient mutually agree to terminate the relationship. 2 The patient unilaterally dismisses (fires) the physician. 3 The physician terminates the relationship after giving the patient notice and a reasonable amount of time to find another physician.
For a patient who is actively treating for a condition, a physician must: give the patient proper notice that the physician is terminating the physician-patient relationship , and. give the patient sufficient time to find another physician before finally refusing to treat the patient any further.
However, if the physician never formally terminated the physician-patient relationship, then, depending on the circumstances, the patient may have a reasonable expectation that the physician will continue to treat the patient.
the patient needed continuing medical treatment. the physician stopped treating the patient. the physician did not give the patient enough time to find another doctor before the physician stopped his/her treatment of the patient. as a result of the physician's abandonment of the patient, the patient's condition was made worse.
Let's say that a physician stops seeing a patient without giving proper notice, and, as a result, the patient goes without medical treatment for three months. As a result of this three month gap in treatment, the patient is left with a permanent disability.
A patient's failure or inability to pay the physician's medical bill does not in itself terminate the physician-patient relationship. The physician may choose to terminate the relationship because the patient has not paid the bill, but the doctor still must give proper notice as described above.