The medical malpractice lawsuit, patients are difficult to prove. And, there is against equity. We have a problem even in part to apply for damages under civil law. In the case law, Comparative negligence is much appearance. Alimony, it is impossible to us to replenish the property damage. In conclusion, the patient, less susceptible to compensation for damages.
An analysis of the 2014 judicial yearbook (statistics), medical malpractice litigation that our court has processed, in the total of 960, the plaintiff completely won 14, but the plaintiff part won 287 plaintiff rate is 31.4 percent, plaintiff full prevailing rate is not still only 1.5%. This shows a numeric value not less than the plaintiff completely in favor of 1 of 7 minutes as compared to 10.8% of other civil damages lawsuit. Full prevailing rate is seriously low Such a result is, as described above, can be seen as the intervention of the responsibility of doctors limit(Comparative negligence) was frequently. This is directly connected also with the problem of the burden of court costs.
We must admit the economic differences of the patient (plaintiff) and the doctor (defendant). I do not argue that trying to introduce a "Social equity" in judicial decisions saying. It is what I want it to be there is fairness as other damages lawsuit. As revealed in the body, case law are still missing in patients with compensation for damages.
In addition, some of the legal professionals, it concluded that "supplementary means" of action to solve the proven difficulty of medical malpractice the function of Informed Concent. Current cases makes it difficult right remedy substantial patient. Rather than the one of the right relief of patients and doctors, it is required to present a fair new standards.