​If a medical professional's actions or inaction during patient care fail to meet accepted standards of care and result in harm to the patient, the patient may be able to pursue legal action based on the grounds of medical malpractice. Proving harm to the patient is critically important, as a medical professional cannot be charged with medical malpractice simply for making an error. Individuals can seek legal recourse using several distinct types of medical malpractice.

One of the most common examples of medical malpractice is also one of the simplest: misdiagnosis. A misdiagnosis involves a medical professional failing to identify the condition that is causing the patient's symptoms or making an inaccurate assessment of a patient's issues. The complications involved with a misdiagnosis cannot be overstated, as the patient's true condition may develop to the point of being untreatable. 

Wrongful death suits are also possible following a misdiagnosis. It should be noted that making an incorrect diagnosis does not automatically qualify as medical malpractice. To satisfy the grounds of medical malpractice, the incorrect or lack of diagnosis should be a mistake that most doctors would not make.

A delayed diagnosis is similar to a misdiagnosis, but is more concerned with the timeframe. As mentioned, taking too long to make the correct diagnosis can result in irreversible conditions for the patient. To prove medical malpractice, plaintiffs need to demonstrate that the medical professional failed to take basic steps to help determine a diagnosis, such as missing standard tests.

Failure to treat is another example of medical malpractice involving inferior diagnosis processes. In these cases, a correct diagnosis is made in a timely fashion, but medical teams fail to follow through on the diagnosis. For instance, a patient may be released after receiving a diagnosis despite requiring more care.

Surgical errors represent another common and potentially dangerous category of medical malpractice cases, though these errors are distinct from the inherent risks of surgery. Surgeons and other medical professionals can make various mistakes during medical procedures, such as causing avoidable damage to organs, nerves, and body tissue. 

Surgical errors are not limited to mistakes made during the surgical procedure. Failure to properly sterilize medical equipment or to render appropriate aftercare following surgery are further examples of surgical errors that may satisfy the standards of medical malpractice. Performing an unnecessary surgical procedure may also constitute medical malpractice.

Certain types of medical malpractice are more specific than others. Birth injuries, for example, only affect pregnant women and newborns. The majority of medical malpractice claims in the United States are filed against OB/GYNs because of birth injuries, a type of medical error. A few examples of birth injuries include nerve damage, shoulder dystocia, and various spinal cord injuries.

Prescription drug errors, meanwhile, range from instances of misdiagnosis to medication manufacturers filling the wrong prescription, resulting in the patient taking an incorrect medication or dose. Patients can suffer several ailments as a result of taking the wrong medication, in addition to the fact that they will not be treating the condition for which they received the prescription.

Finally, patients who experience anesthesia errors may be able to pursue legal action on the grounds of medical malpractice. If an anesthesia professional fails to properly sedate a patient, the patient can suffer from many long-lasting conditions, from chronic pain to brain injuries.

​The COVID-19 pandemic had a profound impact on mental health care and access to emergency medical services by vulnerable populations, which manifested in various ways, depending on the patient population and type of malady.

In the June 2025 issue of The Journal of Emergency Medicine, researchers at the University of California, San Diego Medical Center explored psychiatric emergencies. In the article “Acute Health Care Utilization Among Schizophrenia or Related Conditions and Bipolar Disorder Before, During, and After COVID-19,” the authors characterize providing mental health (MH) resources as a “pervasive challenge” in many American communities.

With diagnoses of severe mental illness (SMI) on the rise, emergency departments (EDs) often bear the brunt of the responsibility of caring for patients with acute mental health issues. The assistance and care they provide help address severe psychological distress and acute crises.

The authors of the four-year multicenter retrospective analysis of California emergency departments note that, before the pandemic, cases of mental illness-related ED visits were on a consistent uptrend. A National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey spanning 2016 to 2018 found 43.9 ED visits per 1000 adults related to mental illnesses. Another study documented a 39.7 rise in severe MH ED visits in California between the years 2005 and 2015.

As a coordinated pandemic response evolved, the COVID-19 protocol resulted in a 4.3 percent decrease in overall ED visits (prior to the initial emergency shutdown). This reversed an upward trend: ED hospital visits rose from 11.8 million in 2018 to 12 million the following year. They decreased to a nadir of 10.2 million in 2020 before partially recovering in 2021 to 10.9 million ED visits.

While SMI-related ED visits also decreased, in line with the overall trend, they continued to represent a substantial number of ED visits, with patients with mental issues still seeking care. Indeed, the authors found that SMI-related ED visits (per 100,000 visits) rose between 2019 and 2020 and remained elevated the following year. Those with the highest utilization rates for SMI-related ED visits included Medicaid beneficiaries, those aged 25 to 44, and African Americans. Across California, Los Angeles County had a consistently high representation. The authors conclude that the ED played an even more vital role in addressing mental health issues during the pandemic than before; the number of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder patients rose as a proportion of total ED visits.

Another study, “The Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Psychiatric Emergencies in Two Different Settings: Emergency Room and Community Mental Health Service” (Frontiers in Psychiatry, May 2022), collected data in a northern Italian town from 2020 to 2021. The monocentric observational study revealed a 24 percent decrease in urgent psychiatric consultations (UPCs) within an ED setting. At the same time, UPCs increased by four percent in community mental health service (CMHS) settings.

Interestingly, while UPC visits to ED decreased among the general population, they increased among those who had disability pensions or resided in psychiatric facilities. Within the CMHS setting, the uptick reflected more older people and those living in other institutions requiring UPC. Most frequently, UPC visits to the ED reflected issues such as socio-environmental maladjustment and aggressiveness, as well as the psychiatric symptoms of existing mental disorders. By contrast, UPC visits to CMHS tended to reflect patients’ mixed affective/manic states, as well as issues related to psychopharmacology therapies.

These findings also point to a proportional increase in vulnerable people requiring more frequent mental health care and attention throughout the pandemic. As the authors put it, the pandemic “disrupted individuals’ ability to adapt and induced many stressful reactive symptoms.”

​Differential diagnosis demands that doctors carefully analyze a patient's symptoms to determine the correct cause among several possibilities. Inaccurate judgments can postpone effective treatment and impair outcomes. Methodical doctors who list all possible diseases and rule them out one by one are more likely to find the actual problem early on.

A standard error occurs when doctors fixate on their initial impression. They may then ignore indicators that contradict this first appraisal. This often happens in fast-paced, time-pressed situations. Physicians should actively seek evidence that challenges their early beliefs to avoid this trap and investigate more options.

Incomplete patient histories create significant obstacles. Doctors risk missing necessary signals in difficult or rare cases without a full explanation of a patient's medical history, current symptoms, or lifestyle circumstances. Time spent asking detailed questions or contacting family members to clarify ambiguous details helps build a complete patient health picture.

Experienced physicians sometimes rely too heavily on recognizing familiar symptom patterns. Based on past experiences, they may readily identify symptoms with common illnesses and miss rare or atypical ailments. Doctors can avoid missing less evident diagnoses by combining swift pattern identification with a more deliberate, analytical assessment of all probable reasons.

Anchoring on an early diagnosis can limit a doctor's perspective. Some doctors stick to their initial idea despite additional symptoms or test results. Doctors can adjust to new knowledge and prevent premature conclusions by regularly reassessing the list of probable illnesses.

Misusing or bypassing diagnostic tests often derails the process. Ordering inappropriate tests or misinterpreting results can send physicians down the wrong path, leading to faulty conclusions. Adhering to evidence-based testing protocols and seeking specialist input when results appear ambiguous strengthens the diagnostic process and improves accuracy.

Time constraints in busy clinical settings frequently lead to rushed judgments. In hectic environments like emergency rooms, doctors may settle on a diagnosis too quickly, missing subtle but critical details. Allocating sufficient time for a thorough evaluation, even under pressure, and using tools like diagnostic checklists helps maintain a careful and systematic approach to identifying the cause.

Rare diseases often go unnoticed because their symptoms can resemble those of more common conditions. Physicians might dismiss these less likely possibilities, especially when pressed for time or when symptoms seem familiar. Keeping rare conditions on the radar, particularly when standard explanations fall short, encourages a more thorough exploration of all potential causes.

Communication breakdowns with patients can obscure the diagnostic picture. Vague or incomplete symptom descriptions from patients may lead doctors to misinterpret the situation. Encouraging patients to provide specific, detailed accounts and asking clarifying questions when responses seem unclear builds a stronger foundation for reaching an accurate diagnosis.

Failing to consult colleagues also reduces diagnostic precision. Discussing cases with peers or specialists might provide insights that a single practitioner may miss, especially in difficult instances. A team, especially for complex or puzzling cases, gives multiple viewpoints and improves diagnosis.

Cultural or social factors sometimes go unconsidered, skewing the diagnostic process. Doctors may miss community-specific illnesses due to lifestyle, nutrition, and environmental assumptions. Exploring a patient's background ensures a diagnosis that fits their circumstances and eliminates bias-based errors.

Neglecting psychological factors can also lead to diagnostic errors. Mental illness can cause weariness and suffering. However, doctors focusing on physical symptoms may miss these factors. Mental health screening, especially for vague or persistent symptoms, ensures a more complete diagnosis.

The field of medicine evolves constantly, with new conditions, diagnostic tools, and treatments emerging regularly. Physicians who don't update their knowledge risk using outdated methods and making mistakes. Continuous education through journals, conferences, or online courses helps clinicians adjust their diagnostic methods to the newest knowledge, protecting patients from unnecessary errors and improving results in a changing medical landscape.

​Medical malpractice occurs when a healthcare professional's negligence causes harm to a patient. One of the most prevalent medical malpractices is misdiagnosis, which can take the form of a wrong, missed, or delayed diagnosis. Here is how patients can help reduce diagnostic errors.

Misdiagnosis means the real condition or disease goes untreated until it's too late. For example, an injury that a simple surgically might have fixed may progress to a point where amputation is done. In addition to resulting in needless hospital bills, misdiagnosis may expose patients to complications and injuries from unnecessary surgical procedures.

Common causes of misdiagnosis include insufficient time with patients, improper testing, inexperience, and overconfidence. Not all misdiagnosis cases are due to negligence. A glitch in testing equipment or an honest mistake, for example, in collecting, handling, or processing samples, may result in a misdiagnosis.

Patients can help reduce the risk of misdiagnosis by being proactive and informed. Seeking medical help as soon one feels unwell helps avoid delayed diagnosis. Being proactive also means showing up for appointments, undergoing all necessary tests, and reviewing results with the doctor.

During a diagnosis, a professional asks questions relating to a problem. They may use previous diagnoses to eliminate unnecessary tests. Volunteering all the details about symptoms, lifestyle, or any medications one might be taking helps the physician narrow down the problem.

One of the leading causes of misdiagnosis is self-diagnosis. When a patient dismisses some symptoms as irrelevant and not worth mentioning, they cause their doctor to make an uninformed decision.

Patient involvement is crucial for timely and accurate diagnosis. An involved patient can catch inconsistencies and ask questions whenever something is unclear. They can also challenge their physician's assumptions. Patients should inquire about alternate tests worth considering. If the recommended treatment fails, patients should notify their physician.

Patients should always be open to seeking a second opinion. Perhaps the lab overlooked something, or the radiologist missed something in an X-ray image. Having another professional review test results or treatment recommendations or run separate tests before proceeding with treatment helps avoid unnecessary procedures.

While seeking a second opinion is recommended, switching between medical providers can open an information gap. Another common cause of information gaps is when a patient is transferred between facilities or departments. To prevent information gaps, patients should know their medical history and past diagnoses and treatments. They should also ensure that subsequent practitioners are adequately informed.

Healthcare settings can be intimidating. That, coupled with their fast-paced nature, can cause patients to overlook or forget some symptoms or questions. Individuals should track symptoms, even seemingly unrelated signs. They should also write down any concerns or questions they might have concerning their symptoms.

Healthcare providers recognize the impact of interpreters on patient outcomes; as such, some provide trained interpreters. Interpreters help bridge the communication gap. Older patients and those with a limited understanding of English or medical terms should have someone accompany them to appointments. A third party will help ensure the patient understands the practitioner and vice versa. They could also advocate for the patient.

Misdiagnosis has far-reaching implications for patients. Moreover, it's hard to prove that a misdiagnosis was due to negligence. Patients should never take chances. They should participate in the diagnosis by volunteering information, asking questions, and seeking clarifications. Even simply repeating what they understood can help a practitioner catch an error.

​The field of emergency medicine is a medical specialty that deals with the diagnosis and treatment of unexpected injuries and illnesses. Emergency medicine practitioners must develop a wide range of skills, as described by the Model of the Clinical Practice of Emergency Medicine.

In addition to the diversity of conditions that practitioners must prepare for, the field of emergency medicine encompasses the complete spectrum of care, from the initial assessment and diagnosis through all facets of treatment, including medical, surgical, and psychiatric procedures. Services may be provided in various settings, including freestanding and hospital-based emergency departments, urgent care clinics, and medical response vehicles. Emergency medical professionals may also render care at the site of a disaster or accident.

Practitioners of emergency medicine are also involved in related clinical and administrative processes, such as authorizing out-of-hospital medical control systems and coordinating on-site emergency medical response services. They often assist community leaders with matters of disaster preparedness and drive emergency department strategy and leadership, which includes optimizing patient intake processes and ensuring compliance with the Emergency Medical Treatment & Labor Act.

As emergency medical practitioners advance in their careers, they take on emergency department budgeting and staffing responsibilities and help develop departmental policies and procedures, which are critical to optimizing patient outcomes. They also must stay current by meeting continuing education mandates.

Perhaps most importantly, emergency medical professionals function as the bedrock of the national healthcare system's patient safety net. With this in mind, practitioners must coordinate emergency department patient care across numerous healthcare providers and medical facilities. They should also leverage their deep knowledge of the healthcare delivery system to help elevate local, regional, and national health policy initiatives.

While the history of treating seriously ill and injured patients in the United States can be traced back hundreds of years, the concept of organized emergency medical care is relatively new, beginning late in the 20th century. The field did not achieve specialty recognition until 1979.

Several factors motivated the development of emergency medical care in the US, but the driving force involved the increasing quality of life and standard of living throughout the country. As time progressed, more Americans benefited from the mobility of cars, making it easier to seek out unscheduled medical care.

Similarly, many Americans gained access to increased financial support to fund these unplanned visits. The healthcare delivery system of the past could not handle the influx of unscheduled patient visits and had to change, resulting in the development of the emergency medicine specialty.

Established in 1968, the Emergency College of American Physicians was the first organization that dedicated itself to emergency medical education and service. Two years later, the nation's first emergency medicine residency program opened in Cincinnati. The American Board of Emergency Medicine began operations in 1976, quickly followed by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine. The American Academy of Emergency Medicine has also made significant contributions to the field, including the development of the aforementioned Model of the Clinical Practice of Emergency Medicine.

Interest in emergency medicine has swelled since the turn of the century. From 2000 to 2010, the field grew more than any other medical specialty. Nearly 50,000 American doctors practice emergency medicine. With new residency programs being created at an increasing rate, researchers believe America can achieve a 20 to 30 percent surplus of board-certified emergency physicians by 2030. This compares favorably to a national physician shortage, which is predicted to grow to 86,000 physicians by 2036, according to the Association of American Medical Colleges.

​Volunteering with local community resources offers a meaningful way to give back while at the same gaining personal fulfillment. To get started, individuals should first evaluate their interests and motivations, ensuring they choose roles aligned with their values and skills. Some feel drawn to education, while others focus on environmental or social causes or helping those in need. Identifying these preferences early helps those considering volunteering find opportunities to contribute effectively and make a lasting impact.

The next step is to research available opportunities within the community. Nonprofits, shelters, schools, hospitals, and public service programs seek volunteers, and local volunteer centers can list roles that match skill sets and interests. Community boards, websites, and social media groups list ongoing projects needing help. This research helps potential volunteers understand community needs and choose a role that fits their availability and expertise.

Once an opportunity is identified, the organization must be contacted. Most volunteer programs have coordinators who oversee new applications and provide guidance on available positions. Contact through email or a visit helps clarify expectations, responsibilities, and necessary qualifications. Some roles may require background checks or specific training, making it essential to gather all required information when being considered. Clear communication and asking questions before committing ensures that volunteers understand their obligations and that organizations find reliable individuals suited to their needs.

Understanding time commitments prevents misalignment between volunteers and organizations. Some roles require a regular schedule, while others are flexible, seasonal, or event-based. Being realistic about availability fosters sustained involvement, benefiting both volunteers and organizations. Setting reasonable expectations ensures meaningful and lasting contributions.

Training and orientation often play a vital role in preparing volunteers for their responsibilities. Many organizations offer onboarding workshops that expose new volunteers to their policies, methods, and goals. Training may involve learning safety standards, comprehending ethical norms, or developing technical skills related to a particular profession. These sessions improve effectiveness and help volunteers integrate into teams. Learning also helps people overcome obstacles and contribute with greater confidence.

Once integrated into a volunteer role, open communication with team members and coordinators enhances the overall experience. Asking for advice, feedback, and observations makes everything run more smoothly and boosts productivity. Open communication also includes volunteers voicing issues and suggesting changes. Proactive volunteers frequently get more relevant tasks, as they naturally become valued by their organizations. The person and organization gain from this dynamic partnership by establishing respect and shared goals.

Consistently reflecting on one’s volunteer experiences ensures ongoing personal growth and fulfillment. Individuals can change their engagement by assessing whether a role matches their goals, skills, and long-term goals. Some may find new interests and try other sorts of volunteering, while others may increase their dedication to one area. Monitoring progress and appreciating contributions boosts self-esteem and the value of volunteering.

Beyond the immediate impact of their contributions, volunteers often develop skills that extend into other areas of life. Community service enhances leadership, cooperation, problem-solving, and communication. Networking with like-minded people and professionals in diverse industries also occurs. These relationships can lead to mentorships, collaboration, and job promotion. This makes volunteering a professional and personal growth tool as well as a philanthropic act.

Approaching volunteer work with a long-term perspective maximizes its benefits. Many start with minor jobs and advance as they acquire experience. A habit and an attitude of continual involvement strengthen the work. Over time, those who stay involved see their efforts pay off, adding to their drive. Keeping in mind the more significant impacts of prolonged volunteering gives the day’s efforts more meaning.

​Emergency medicine offers interventions to patients facing life-threatening injuries and illnesses. It is a critical field in which quick decision-making, efficiency, and precision are necessary to save patients’ lives and protect their well-being. Technology has emerged as a potent tool in improving emergency medical services (EMS), enhancing diagnostics, and streamlining facility workflows. This resource is transforming how emergency departments operate and optimizing treatment outcomes. Telemedicine, artificial intelligence (AI), wearable devices, robotics, and electronic health records (EHR) are popular innovations influencing emergency medicine.

Telemedicine allows patients to more easily access health care, particularly those living in underserved and remote areas. Through video consultations and remote diagnostics, emergency physicians can interact with patients, provide guidance to paramedics, and determine if hospitalization is necessary. This innovation facilitates early intervention and has been effective in various efforts, such as stroke care and disaster response. In stroke care, neurologists can review patients’ imaging results and promptly guide care providers on the necessary treatment plans. Similarly, in disaster response, specialists can offer real-time guidance to local care providers and paramedics on handling patients, circumventing the inaccessibility challenges that are common within affected locations.

AI is helping physicians diagnose conditions more accurately and efficiently. AI-powered algorithms analyze medical data, identify patterns, and provide clinical decision support, assisting EMS professionals in making rapid and evidence-based decisions. A popular example of this technology’s influence is in radiology, where radiologists can leverage AI-driven imaging interpretation to detect fractures, brain hemorrhages, and pulmonary embolisms quickly and accurately. Another application of this technology is the use of predictive analytics, a feature of AI that analyzes data to make predictions. Using this technology, emergency departments can anticipate patient surges and create suitable plans to serve these patients with effective resource allocation.

Wearable devices continuously monitor patients’ vital signs, including heart rate, temperature, and blood pressure, and communicate this information to care providers. These devices alert EMS professionals and patients when vital signs deviate from baseline, prompting immediate medical attention or proactive intervention by care providers. Smartwatches with electrocardiogram (ECG) capabilities, for instance, are administered to cardiac patients to detect irregular heart rhythms, such as atrial fibrillation, and prompt early medical intervention when necessary. Similarly, wearable glucose monitors enable diabetic patients to better control their blood sugar levels, reducing the risk of diabetic emergency interventions.

Robotics is also revolutionizing emergency medicine. Robot-assisted surgery is now commonly used in trauma care, since it allows minimally invasive procedures to be carried out with high levels of precision. Surgeons use this resource to hold and use their equipment. They then attach a small camera to the robotic arm to take enhanced, magnified pictures of the surgical area. Notably, these devices do not replace surgeons, but rather improve their precision and in many cases eliminate the need for open surgery. Several types of specialists rely on robot-assisted surgery to treat patients, including urologists, brain surgeons, spinal surgeons, and gynecologists.

EHR systems store patient information in a centralized database, including their medication history, allergies, and past surgeries. Within emergency rooms, having this information helps EMS professionals make informed decisions related to suitable medication, diagnostic tests, and treatment plans. Moreover, EHR systems facilitate communication and collaboration among various specialists when working on patients in critical conditions. The ability to access this data in real time improves efficiency and promotes positive health outcomes.

Despite its benefits to emergency medicine, emergency medical technology faces two primary challenges. One is data privacy and security. Critics argue that collecting and storing patient information can attract cyberattacks, leading to the loss of or unethical access to sensitive information. To mitigate this, facilities and emergency departments should invest in robust cybersecurity and implement tactics like data encryption and access control.

Secondly, there are concerns about over-reliance on technology when developing intervention strategies. Critics point out the possibility of bias in algorithms, particularly when using AI. To address this, it is imperative to maintain human oversight so that the judgment of experienced health care professionals is prioritized in clinical decision-making.

​
“An Ethical Analysis of the Arguments Both For and Against COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates for Healthcare Workers” (Journal of Emergency Medicine, 2022) focuses on the development of U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved vaccines that led to mandatory immunization requirements for many healthcare workers wishing to avoid state medical board censure and loss of job.

While a majority of those in the medical profession accepted vaccine mandates, a vocal few characterized them as unnecessary and intrusive, as it violated their civil liberties and right to pursue whatever health care mitigation steps they saw fit.

Vaccine mandates historically fall under the purview of nations worldwide, starting with the state of Bavaria in Germany, which required smallpox vaccines shortly after they were developed in 1807. The precedent-setting 1905 U.S. Supreme Court case Jacobson vs. Massachusetts established that vaccine mandates at state levels were enforceable and legal when necessary to protect public health.

Today such mandates meet the criterion of “acceptability,” or something generally accepted by the public at large. This is particularly true when vaccine requirements are consistently applied in a way that is just, or “fair, equitable, and appropriate” to all involved, whether healthcare workers or ordinary citizens. With the demonstrated benefits of immunity to COVID-19 substantially outweighing the risks, vaccines meet this criterion. Further they are administered through legal means without bias or discrimination, and constitute a “necessary treatment.”

Precedent favors this perspective as well: over the past half-century, those who work in health care have generally abided by requirements that obtaining hospital privileges goes hand in hand with mandatory vaccines, when circumstances dictate. Before March 2020, when COVID-19 restrictions took hold, mandatory vaccination proof, or proof of immunity, regarding rubella, mumps, measles, hepatitis B, and tetanus was standard when obtaining clinical work engagements in a majority of US healthcare settings.

Another aspect of this argument is the concept of nonmaleficence, which aligns physicians with the Hippocratic Oath and a promise to “act in a way which does no harm.” In remaining unvaccinated, healthcare workers are not simply exercising free will. Because they interact with coworkers and members of the public in physical settings, they are exposing highly vulnerable people to potential viral transmission.

Beyond this, healthcare workers’ decision not to get vaccinated depletes society of the very type of professionals necessary to assist patients during a pandemic. The physician–patient relationship, as well as the societal healthcare construct, suffer as a result. Refusal to get vaccinated counters the utilitarian principle that underlies the intersection between public health policy, law, and ethics, of accomplishing “the best for the most.”

With utilitarian arguments common during crisis, such formulations can infringe on the individual’s rights. Some healthcare workers argued that, while the seasonal flu vaccine is readily available and required in numerous healthcare settings, it is not mandated at a policy level. Indeed, there are workarounds as a professional, such as wearing a mask throughout the flu season.

However, a new type of easily transmissible virus that has severe effects is different. In such a situation, one must weigh the level of risk with the unknown effects of a new virus. COVID-19 poses a greater threat to more people than the common flu. In turn, higher risks make an overarching mandate more necessary and permissible.

The authors go on to tie the vaccine mandate to the philosopher Immanuel Kant’s categorical imperative, which holds that moral laws are applicable to every individual. In particular, universalizability dictates that one should, as a moral actor, consider what the consequences would be if all other individuals acted in the way one is acting. Moral self-governance requires actions that one may not agree with or prefer, but which one submits to when they serve the greater good and, by extension, the well-being of fellow humans.

​Medical malpractice represents a critical concern in healthcare. When medical professionals fail to provide the standard of care expected in their field, they potentially cause significant harm to patients. Studies suggest that medical mistakes can result in as many as 251,000 deaths annually in the United States, which makes medical errors the third leading cause of death.

There are several forms of medical malpractice. Misdiagnosis stands as one of the most prevalent forms of medical error. This occurs when healthcare providers fail to recognize or correctly identify a patient's medical condition, potentially leading to incorrect treatments, missed treatment windows, and even fatal consequences. For a misdiagnosis to qualify as malpractice, the doctor must have performed below the standard expected of their professional peers.

Surgical errors represent another significant area of medical malpractice. These can range from performing unnecessary procedures to leaving surgical instruments inside patients, causing avoidable damage to organs or tissues, or failing to maintain sterile equipment. While surgical procedures can never be risk-free, medical professionals are obligated to inform patients about these risks. Malpractice occurs when errors extend beyond anticipated surgical complications.

Prescription drug errors pose another substantial risk to patients. These mistakes can involve prescribing incorrect medications, miscalculating dosages, or failing to consider potential drug interactions. For example, doctors may inadvertently prescribe a blood thinner without considering its interaction with other drugs the patient is already taking or the patient's pre-existing conditions. In fact, blood thinners are responsible for almost seven percent of medication errors in hospitalized patients.

Birth injuries represent a particularly sensitive category of medical malpractice. Complications during childbirth can result in nerve damage, spinal cord injuries, cerebral palsy, and other long-term conditions. Most medical malpractice claims against obstetricians and gynecologists stem from these potentially preventable birth-related injuries.

Lawyers need to examine multiple elements when taking on a medical malpractice case. Firstly, the lawyer must demonstrate that the interaction between doctor and patient actually entailed an owed professional duty or service. Second, lawyers need to prove that the doctor failed to provide the standard of care, thus breaching this duty. Third, lawyers need to establish causation; the breach must have directly caused an injury. Finally, the injury must have resulted in significant damages, which could include physical suffering, loss of income, disability, or emotional distress.

Informed consent is a key tenet of modern medicine, and overlooking it when dealing with patients can lead to medical malpractice. If a healthcare provider fails to fully disclose potential risks associated with a procedure, they may be liable for damages, even if the procedure itself was performed correctly. For instance, a surgeon who does not inform a patient about a significant risk of limb loss could be held responsible if such a complication occurs.

The legal process for medical malpractice cases is complex and often stressful. Plaintiffs must meticulously document evidence, often requiring expert testimony to establish the standard of care and demonstrate negligence. Compensation can cover economic damages like medical expenses and lost earnings, as well as non-economic damages for pain and suffering.

Prevention remains the most effective strategy. Hospitals and healthcare institutions are increasingly implementing best practices, such as establishing clear guidelines and enforcing strict hygiene protocols, to minimize the occurrence of medical errors.

For individuals who suspect they have experienced medical malpractice, seeking consultation with an experienced medical malpractice attorney is crucial. These legal professionals can help evaluate the specifics of a case, determine its viability, and guide patients through the complex legal landscape of medical negligence claims.