Claims of medical malpractice leveled against doctors in Harrisburg often come down to issues regarding the accepted standard of care. Patients may argue that their doctors deviated from it; doctors may counter that they did nothing wrong and that their work was justified. It may be true that no medical procedure is offered with a “money back guarantee,” yet most patients assume that by following the recommendations of their doctors, they will achieve the outcomes they are hoping for (while avoiding complications at the same time). If poor outcomes are believed to the fault of a doctor’s methods, it may be easy to see why those affected by them want to pursue legal recourse.
Such assistance recently led to the awarding of multi-million dollar judgment to the family of a Massachussets woman who died following surgery in 2013. The woman underwent a laparoscopic procedure to repair a hiatal hernia. The doctor who performed the procedure used surgical mesh secured with tacks to close an opening in her diaphragm (a method cited by an expert witness as routine and one that the doctor had utilized in hundreds of other procedures). However, the woman died from cardiac arrest two days after the surgery. Her family claims that an autopsy revealed markings on her heart, which they believe were caused by the tacks the doctor used. He and his supporters disagreed, yet the jury hearing the case sided with the woman’s family.
Doctors may have their own preferred methods, yet that may not necessarily mean those the methods are the best and most effective. If they are thought to also be potentially dangerous, then one may question why doctors would adhere to them. Those looking to raise that question through a medical malpractice lawsuit might do well to seek the guidance of an attorney.