This article examines the liability, damages and result from a reported case where a physician was absent while his female patient had a placental abruption that led to fetal distress and the loss of her unborn child while a nurse who witnessed the complication worsen failed to advise a different physician of what was going on when the first obstetrician did not turn up. The unborn child did not survive and the physician and nurse were sued for medical malpractice.
A placental abruption is a significant complication that may come up while a woman is pregnant. In cases where it happens steps ought to be taken without delay or the unborn baby is at risk of considerable brain damage or even death. There are several typical types of medical mistakes that show up when medical staff handle a placental abruption that lead to these highly tragic results. An analysis of three lawsuits uncovers how these familiar kinds of medical errors arise and may result in a medical malpractice claim.
Approximately forty eight thousand individuals will pass away from colon cancer this year. Many of these deaths may have been prevented with early diagnosis and treatment by means of routine colon cancer screening tests. Unfortunately, a number of doctors fail to advocate routine colon cancer screening tests to their patients. This might fall below the standard of care and lead to a medical malpractice claim.
What if you let your physicians know you were showing symptoms that could be caused by prostate cancer for five years; your physicians monitor your symptoms and document abnormal screening test outcomes throughout that time; yet your doctors failed to redo a biopsy beyond the first year. Now imagine discovering that now you have metastatic prostate cancer. Just this type of scenario and the resulting lawsuit are reviewed in this article.
This article analyzes a reported $12 million jury verdict in a medical malpractice case concerning the delayed diagnosis of a woman's breast cancer as a result of 2 mammograms being misread by 2 different doctors at two different hospitals. As a result of the ensuing delay the woman's cancer metastasized before she was finally diagnosed.
Doctors obtain take blood from patients for a reason. If a patient's blood tests come back abnormally high or low this may indicate that something is wrong. Follow up is then vital to figure out the reason the results are abnormal. In one published matter a patient's physician did not follow up and thus delayed the patient's detection of colon cancer until it had reached an advanced stage.
A newborn with a Group B Strep infection is at serious risk of developing sepsis, pneumonia or meningitis - that, in turn, may cause grave disabilities or the loss of the child. Physicians understand that a pregnant woman who is a carrier could transmit the bacteria to her infantless antibiotics are administered during labor. This post looks at the report of a lawsuit alleging that a doctor failed to administer antibiotics even though the physician recognized the woman had a known risk factor for transmitting the bacteria to her infant.
Hearing from your physician that you simply have fibrocystic breast changes and there is no need to be concerned concerning the mass in your breast can sound reassuring. However unless the doctor performs the right diagnostic test to rule out breast cancer, you might not discover that you have it until it is too late. In the event that this takes place, you might have a legal claim for medical malpractice against that doctor.
A group b strep infection may end in serious damage to a baby . It is therefore critical for doctors to consider it in the differential diagnosis when babies show symptoms. This article considers a lawsuit filed by a mother whose infant sustained permanent disabilities as a consequence of a doctor's failure to do so and to immediately treat the newborn.
This article considers a published $850,000 settlement in a medical malpractice case alleging that the plaintiff's doctor only partially screened the patient and failed to take the correct action when the results of screening tests came back as abnormal. Due to the delay, the individual's cancer grew outside the prostategiving the patient an estimated 2-3 years prior to dieing from the cancer.
|         |