What is the most common defense used by physicians in malpractice cases?

In malpractice cases, the most common defense employed by physicians often revolves around denial. This defense strategy entails the physician asserting that they did not commit the alleged negligent act or that the care provided met the standard expected of a medical professional. By denying the allegations, the physician aims to undermine the plaintiff's claims and demonstrate that there was no fault on their part regarding the patient's care or outcomes.

Denial as a defense leans heavily on the evidence presented, with the physician often aiming to provide counterarguments to any claims of negligence. This approach is grounded in the legal principle that the burden of proof lies with the plaintiff, necessitating that they establish—not only that there was a deviation from the standard of care—but also that this deviation directly caused harm to the patient. Successful denial hinges on the physician’s ability to show the appropriateness of their medical decisions and actions leading up to the alleged malpractice.

Other options such as informed consent involve discussions between a patient and physician about treatment options and potential risks, while good faith effort pertains to demonstrating that all reasonable precautions were taken to provide proper care. The statute of limitations encompasses the time frame within which a patient can file a lawsuit but does not directly address the merits of the case. In contrast, denial as a defense