- Joined
- Jan 2, 2013
- Messages
- 7,017
- Points
- 113
Doesnt work that way.
If the breach of duty has caused harm eg missed diagnosis of cancer then yes negligent.
But did this lady have cancer in 2007?
It is just the way the law works. Dont know enough of the details of the case to comment. Like what happened to the lady between 2007 and 2010?
Also is the lung cancer in that original nodule that was on the xray in 2007?
When I meant cause. I said specifically cause of the cancer spreading. Not cause of cancer.
You people are always so quick to slam drs. Like what's the problem man? Drs are people too. Many are good people. They have families too. But the hatred of doctors in sinkieland is so great.
I am so glad I left the fucking sinkies.
Not all doctors are hated. My family GP is great, on the other hand I give thumbs down to a paediatrician we used to see. Patients put the trust on doctors as expert, I think doctors should have some concern for the patient and not treat him/her as a statistic. In the same vein if a public accountant fails to detect a fraud when he should reasonably had, the repercussions are severe. No matter how, the judge cannot leave the patient to struggle further - the least he could have done is to award damages to the patient and not made a few useless statements like “hospital should settle with patient”