Really bad medical care – and I mean stuff that is truly awful – does not necessarily equate to a good medical malpractice case.
That seems counter-intuitive, I know.
To have a viable medical malpractice case, there must be medical care that is negligent (often called a breach of the standard of care), and that negligence must have caused harm. You must have both, always. Moreover, you must be able to prove both with credible expert testimony. That threshold is a high one. These cases are complicated and expensive.
We are frequently contacted by patients who have had a nightmarish medical experience. You hear the tale and cringe. However, while the outcome could have been a disaster, it wasn’t. The care was atrocious – there is often no doubt about that – but no harm was done. The patient is no worse off than if he or she had gotten good care.
We decline those cases – and at times we’ve seen people get really upset about it.
“But they almost killed me!” That’s a response we have heard a few times.
Once, I had someone get extremely unhappy with me about such a decision. Trying to be a calm and wise attorney, I explained the situation in a number of ways. Nothing seemed to work. Finally, I got exasperated:
“Would you rather be dead? You’d have a good case – if you were dead.” I wouldn’t say I was yelling, but some might say I was a bit too forceful.
The individual was not exactly mollified – he still wanted compensation for bad care – but he did admit to being glad he was still alive.
We do no one any favors by taking cases where there is not a reasonable chance of getting a recovery for the client. We have a lot of experience. While we are not perfect, we know what we are doing. It’s our duty to give our best advice.
Bottom line: We are honest with people, even if it is not what they want to hear.
You should expect nothing less from your lawyers.
Comments