The Standard of Care for Doctors

In a civil lawsuit based on negligence, the person who is or was allegedly negligent has his or her actions compared to those of an average reasonable person. This person is not a real person but more a fictitious, amorphous ideal of a sensible person that always acts reasonably. Depending on the deviation of the allegedly negligent person’s actions from what the reasonable person would have done. Unfortunately for doctors, their allegedly negligent actions are not compared to the actions of the average reasonable person but rather to the actions of a reasonably prudent doctor with the same experience.

Because the doctor is compared to the standards of a reasonable doctor, the standards which the negligent individual must meet are higher to escape charges of negligence than for those who are just normal people. There are questions of whether a doctor in a fairly rural area should be held to the standards of a doctor working in a world-class internationally known medical center. In most cases, it has been determined that a doctor in the suburbs should be held to those standards more than a doctor that works in a completely rural environment.

Another big question in the reasonable person standard is whether or not cutting-edge techniques or methods should be factored into the equation. Some feel that if a doctor opts to try for a less-established, somewhat experimental technique over something much more traditional and generally successful, the standard for negligence should change with the changes in technique.

Contact a Pennsylvania Medical Malpractice Lawyer

If you have been forced to suffer through the negligent actions of a doctor, hospital, or surgeon, contact a Pennsylvania medical malpractice lawyer of Lowenthal & Abrams at 610-667-7511 in order to discuss your legal options and to receive a free case evaluation conducted by a medical professional.