Ask a Law Question, Get an Answer ASAP!
Hello please explain your query so I can see if I can assist.
Firstly just to let you know, in a medical negligence action it is possible to sue more than one party, whether they recommended or administered the drug. However from your options, I would state the first one is a stronger argument on the basis that for a recommendation to take place, a diagnosis and risk assessment should have taken place prior. And if that risk assessment has been done to a standard less than that expected of a prudent reasonable and capable Doctor, then the breach would be stronger, as it is more reckless.
Then I’d ask who undertook the examination? Who signed it off that it was what you needed? In all honesty it wouldn’t matter because it seems like a negligent action all around; as a result of mediocre professional decisions you have had adverse effects you wouldn’t have had otherwise, by either their acts and/or omissions.
Needless to say I do not know the back story of your case and who has done what, so based on the information you have shared, I would choose option 1. But please feel free to provide more information if you wish, and I can provide a more accurate response.
Is that a defence they are using? Because it isn’t a valid one. They are medical professionals because of their knowledge expertise and qualifications, so it wouldn’t matter if the patient was oblivious or a fellow professional. If it is not a defence, then I do not see the relevance in that statement or how it would absolve them of any liability for a negligent action in administering certain medication or drugs which has caused a bad effect on someone. Although, I suppose they have to try and conjure a reason.
No, I’m sorry. If they are medically qualified professionals then an excuse of just carrying it out would not absolve them of liability, essentially just following orders. This is not viable as anyone can follow orders. It is a lesser offence than one of the person who ordered the administration but then you’d look at the institution as a whole and the procedures and policies it follows. The patient being oblivious is not a strong argument I’m afraid because factually speaking; a negligent action has occurred which has resulted in loss and damage therefore someone is liable for this, and it isn’t the patient.
Option 1 is stronger argument to have against the Doctor.
Consent is always required. And if the patient is incapacitated then consent is required through a litigation friend. But when we are speaking about a negligent action, that is a different matter. If a professional owes a duty of care to ensure their acts do not cause harm to the patient, then consent is inconsequential. Unless a disclaimer has been signed but even then, it goes back to the risk assessment, now likely is it that this patient will suffer as a result of my actions?
Yes you are quite correct, statute of limitations will not apply and you may have a case.
Hello I believe I have already answered this one for you.
I would choose the first one