Medical Malpractice Expert Witness - Who Are They

During a medical malpractice case, a medical malpractice expert witness is necessary in order to inform the jurors of what the standards of care are for the case in question, and whether or not the accused doctor met the standards of care or was negligent in the treatment that was given to the patient. The medical malpractice expert witness gives their opinion on what should have happened in any given case compared to what did happen. They also give their opinion on whether or not what happened was the most probable cause for the damage that was done.

A medical malpractice expert witness should have a current valid medical license in the state where they practice medicine, should be certified by the relevant board recognized by the American Medical Association, and they should be actively practicing medicine in the field in which they are testifying, and have experience performing the skills involved in the malpractice suit. Any medical malpractice expert witness is also supposed to be unbiased.

In a medical malpractice law suit, the burden of proof is on the plaintiff, and they need to convince the jury that their evidence of medical malpractice is more likely than any other possible causes of injury as presented by the defendant.

A medical malpractice expert witness will need to testify in the four areas of negligence: duty, breach, harm, and causation. A doctor can make a mistake and cause a bad outcome and it is not malpractice unless these four criteria are met.

Duty is easy to prove since a doctor has a duty to care for his patients. A breach of duty is when the physician is negligent and doesn't provide the patient with an appropriate standard of care. A personal loss, injury, or deterioration of the patient's condition is the definition of harm, and causation is necessary to show that the harm was caused by the breach of duty when the doctor was negligent in doing his duty to care for the patient.

The medical expert witness has to say that the evidence seems to show that the doctor did not meet the appropriate standard of care in treating the patient and that as a result of this negligence the patient was harmed in order for it to be a case of medial malpractice.

If the doctor and his or her lawyers and medical malpractice expert witness can show it is more likely that the doctor treated the patient according to the standard of care, or that the doctor's treatment did not result in harm, or that the harm was not caused by the doctor's treatment, then the doctor will not be guilty of medical malpractice.

Privacy Policy