Advertisement

The Theory of Negligent Malpractice

  • Seymour L. Halleck
Part of the Critical Issues in Psychiatry book series (CIPS)

Abstract

While intentional torts are probably of more concern to psychiatrists than to other physicians, the majority of malpractice cases in psychiatry as in other medical specialties are based on theories of negligence. Negligence implies fault on the part of the doctor. At the risk of being repetitious it must be reemphasized that the doctor is not liable simply because the patient suffered an untoward result in the course of treatment. Many patients do not respond favorably to treatment: some do not change, others experience deterioration of their conditions during treatment, and still others are made worse by the treatment. It would be impossible to practice medicine if the doctor could be sued every time there was a bad result. Aside from being liable for intentional wrongs, the doctor can only be sued when he has practiced negligently.

Keywords

Professional Standard Expert Testimony Expert Witness Medical Malpractice Substantial Factor 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Reference

  1. 1.
    Rule v. Cheeseman, 181 Kan. 957, 317 P. 2d 742 (1957).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Neill v. Montefiore Hospital, 11 A.D.2d 132, 135, 202 N.Y.S.2d 436, 439 (1960); Maltempo v. Cuthbery, 504 F.2d 355 (5th Cir. 1974 ).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Batistella v. Society of the New York Hospital, 191 N.Y.S.2d 626 (N.Y. 1959 ).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. R. Holder, “The Physician as Fellow Servant,” Journal of the American Medical Association 223, no. 10 (1973): 1203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. R. Holder, Medical Malpractice Law ( New York: Wiley, 1975 ), p. 41.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Blair v. Eben, 461 S.W.2d 370, 373 (Ky. 1970); Darling y. Charleston Community Memorial Hospital, 33 2d 526, 211 N.E.2d 353 (I11. 1965 ).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. H. King, “In Search of a Standard of Care for the Medical Profession: The ‘Accepted Practice’ Formula,” Vanderbilt Law Review 28 (1975): 1236–44.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chumbler v. McClure, 505 F.2d 489, 492 (6th Cir. 1974 ).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Haase v. Garfinkel, 418 S.W.2d 108, 114 (Mo. 1967 ); Kortus y. Jensen, 237 2d 845 (Neb. 1976).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shier v. Freedman, 58 Wis. 2d 269, 206 N.W.2d 166 (1973).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    J. H. King, The Lain of Medical Malpractice in a Nutshell (St. Paul, Minn.: West, 1977 ), p. 70.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Simpson v. Davis, 219 Kan. 584, 547 P. 2d 950 (1976).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    lncollingo V. Ewing, 282 A.2d 206 (Pa. 1971 ).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Christy v. Saliterman, 179 N.W.2d 288 (Minn. 1970). ’’Helling y. Carey, 83 Wash. 2d. 514, 519 P.2d 981 (1974).Google Scholar
  15. 16.
    Holder, Medical Malpractice Law,p.43. ’7/bid., p. 49.Google Scholar
  16. 18.
    Kaiser y. Suburban Transportation System, 398 P.2d 14 (Wash. 1965 ); Whitfield v. Daniel Construction Co., 83 S.E. 2d 410 (S.C. 1965).Google Scholar
  17. 19.
    Krushilla v. United States, 287 F.2d 34 (CCA 2, 1961 ).Google Scholar
  18. 20.
    King, Lau’ of Medical Malpractice, p. 81.Google Scholar
  19. 21.
    Hestbeck v. Hennepin County, 297 Minn. 419Google Scholar
  20. 22.
    S. Messinger, “Malpractice Suits—the Psychiatrist’s Turn,” Journal of Legal Medicine 3 no. 21 (1975): 20–31.Google Scholar
  21. 23.
    Robertson v. LaCroix, 543 P.2d 17 (Okl. 1975 ).Google Scholar
  22. 24.
    Mulder v. Parke Davis and Co., 288 Minn. 332, 340, 181 N.W. 2d 882, 887 (1970).Google Scholar
  23. 25.
    McCormick on Evidence, 744 E. Clears, ed., 2d ed. (St. Paul, Minn.: West, 1972).Google Scholar
  24. 26.
    Stone v. Proctor, 131 S.E.2d 297 (N.C. 1963 ).Google Scholar
  25. 27.
    TLanders y. Flood, 131 Cal. Rptr. 69, 551 F. 2d 389 (1976).Google Scholar
  26. 28.
    A. R. Rosenberg and L. S. Goldsmith, Malpractice Made Easy (New York: Books for Industry, 1976), chap. 9.Google Scholar
  27. 29.
    W. Prosser, The Law of Torts, 4th ed. ( St. Paul, Minn.: West, 1977 ).Google Scholar
  28. 30.
    E. J. Kionka, Torts in a Nutshell (St. Paul, Minn.: West, 1977 ), p. 29.Google Scholar
  29. 31.
    Speed v. State, 240 N.W.2d 901 (Iowa 1976 ).Google Scholar
  30. 32.
    Restatement of Torts 2nd. American Law Institute, 1965.Google Scholar
  31. 33.
    C. G. Post, An Introduction to the Law ( Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1963 ), p. 73.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1980

Authors and Affiliations

  • Seymour L. Halleck
    • 1
  1. 1.University of North CarolinaChapel HillUSA

Personalised recommendations