Malpractice or Fraud?

Throughout this week, I analyzed and wrote an annotated bibliography over five articles. At first, I struggled finding credible sources, but I soon discovered the right places to look. The first article I chose analyzed the application of malpractice law in neurosurgery. The second, third, and fourth articles indepthly highlighted the common malpractice suits. And lastly, the final article explained the statute of limitations in regards to bringing a malpractice suit.

This week, three interesting facts stood out to me:

The first fact I discovered in the first article, which discussed the percentage of possible different outcomes in neurosurgery malpractice cases from 1985-2015. It was interesting to learn that the plaintiff's verdict was reached significantly less percent of the time than the defendant's verdict. However, if the plaintiff did win, the median payout was $2,500,000.

I discovered another interesting fact in the second article I analyzed. I learned that some people try to worsen their injury or illness that resulted out of malpractice to either make their claim stronger or win more money. This is called “mitigating damages” and is considered fraud. Sometimes it is difficult to tell whether the condition of a patient worsened intentionally or on its own.

Lastly, I learned that the statute of limitations in regards to a malpractice claim is 1-3 years, depending on the state. This was particularly interesting because what if the patient doesn’t realize malpractice occurred until after the statute of limitations passed? And when does the statute begin - at the time the malpractice occurred or at the time the patient suffers an injury because of it?

Overall, I feel as though I have a general understanding of the different types of malpractice claims and the statute of limitations. Therefore, for this upcoming week, I want to research more into the process of how a patient files a claim and the steps an attorney takes after a patient has done so.