ER Nurse, in this thread (regarding remedying an alleged medical mistake) you pop your head in, give legal advise, fail to say it’s based on your understanding of Washington law and then misstate Washington law on medical malpractice actions.
[li]It’s dangerous to give legal advice on a message board[/li][li]It’s really dangerous to give legal opinions on a message board when you’re not a lawyer[/li][li]It’s even more dangerous to give legal opinions on a message board when you’re not a lawyer and have a very sketchy idea of what the law is[/li][li]But what’s very very wrong is your opinion of what the law is…[/li][/ul]
You give a legal conclusion here:
It appears to me that you are from Washington, the OP querying about remedies is from Maine. Here’s a question: Are you attempting to quote all law in the US, Washington law or perhaps Maine law? It becomes clear later, but trust me you need to indicate this.
Then I popped in to ask you not to throw around your legal ‘knowledge’ unless you really know what you’re talking about. I explained that although I was not familiar with your state’s laws regarding med mal, that I was very familiar with it generally and more so in two states. I explained to you the basic elements that are pretty muched involved in all med mal cases.
You disagreed with me, quoted part of the statute governing med mal cases in Washington.
Guess the fuck what?
This supports exactly what I said: *"Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 7.70.040
Necessary elements of proof that injury resulted from failure to follow accepted standard of care.
The following shall be necessary elements of proof that injury resulted from the failure of the health care provider to follow the accepted standard of care:
(1) The health care provider failed to exercise that degree of care, skill, and learning expected of a reasonably prudent health care provider at that time in the profession or class to which he belongs, in the state of Washington, acting in the same or similar circumstances;
(2) Such failure was a proximate cause of injury."*
This contains the essential elements I discussed with you: Duty appears to come in under the definition of healthcare provider, breach of the standard of care is when “health care provider failed to exercise that degree of care, skill, and learning expected of a reasonably prudent health care provider at that time in the profession or class to which he belongs, in the state of Washington, acting in the same or similar circumstances” Causation is dealt with in two as well as injury. Moreover, as stated by the Washington Supremem Court, “these elements are particularized expressions of the four traditional elements of negligence: duty, breach, proximate cause, and damage or injury.” Berger v. Sonneland 26 P.3d 257, 263-4 (2001).
You appear to distinguish between a failure to act and an act as far as the definition of negligence. Sir/Madam, any first year law student can tell you that negligence is both. There is no such freakin distinction except in your little head.
Then, you say
You’re right there, that’s what I told you, can you not see that, please look at the statute and understand that the law you quoted is for malpractice claims in Washington. If you knew as much as a first year law student you would get this.
And, FWIW, the Washington Supreme Court has held that emotional damages without objective symptomology are recoverable under the statute governing actions against a health care provider. See id. Although what’s fun is the Court doesrequire that an expert testify as to causation which essentially nullifies this…sneaky.
You assume that there is some Uniform Statute governing all medical malpractice in all states–there’s not. Despite the fact that it says ‘uniform’ does not mean every state has it. Many states have something similar to it, but it is not the same and certainly the case law interpreting similar passages in different states is not always the same. So, even if you were right in your assessment of Washington law, you are wrong to give that advice as if it were qually applicable in Maine…
Look, you seem articulate enough, I’m sure you’ll do very well here, but stop with the legal stuff. The small amount of legal knowledge you have from inservices, risk managment, continuing nursing eduction and the like is not enough for you to spout off legal advice here. Dopers generally like you to be able to back up your claims and have a sound factual basis for them. I can’t remember the name of the gentleman/woman that Bricker so recently took to task over spouting off legal bs, but trust me, you don’t want to start feeling like him/her…[sub]and anyway this is not nearly as eloquent as Bricker’s…[/sub]