MEDICAL MALPRACTICE

---

Medical malpractice allegations are files that require high technical knowledge and mandatory multidisciplinary evaluation in criminal, civil, and administrative judicial processes.

As a forensic medicine specialist, scientific, impartial, and reasoned expert opinions are provided in light of medical standards, current literature, and judicial criteria. 

Medical malpractice is the harm caused to the patient as a result of the behavior of a physician or healthcare personnel contrary to medical standards.
In the definition;

• Professional duty of care

• Current medical standards

• Foreseeability

• Causality (causal link)

• Fault rate
  elements are evaluated together.

In this framework;

• Ethical principles of the Turkish Medical Association,

• Patient safety approach of the World Health Organization,

• Precedents of the Supreme Court
  are the basic reference sources in malpractice evaluation.
  Not every negative outcome is malpractice. Every harm related to medical intervention does not mean fault. Evaluation must be done with scientific criteria. 

The most frequently confused concepts in practice are the distinction between complication and faulty medical practice. 

• It is the known and literature-defined risk of medical intervention.

• It can occur despite standard application.

• It is foreseeable but not always preventable.
   

• There is a deviation from the standard.

• There is negligence, delay, or incorrect application in the diagnosis or treatment process.

• A causal link can be established between the occurring harm and the application.

This distinction is the fundamental element determining the legal fate of the file. 

• Reckless injury

• Reckless killing (causing death by negligence)

• Criminal responsibility of healthcare personnel

• etc.
   

•  Pecuniary damages

• Non-pecuniary damages

• Responsibility of private hospitals

• etc.
   

•  Service fault of public hospitals

• Responsibility of the administration  

• etc.
   

• Obstetrics and gynecology

• Plastic, reconstructive and aesthetic surgery 

• Orthopedics and traumatology

• General surger

• Emergency medicine

• Anesthesia and reanimation

• Intensive care practices

• Dentistry practices 

• etc.

  Each file is examined with the following methodology: 

1.  Complete analysis of medical records
    
2.  Chronological evaluation of the diagnosis and treatment process
    
3.  Current national and international literature search
    
4.  Comparative examination with guidelines and manuals
    
5.  Distinction between complication and fault
    
6.  Analysis of the causal link
    
7.  Evaluation of the fault rate
    
8.  Preparation of a report containing scientific justification
    

 The prepared opinion is not just a statement of opinion, but a technical analysis containing scientific grounding .

Is every complication malpractice?
No. Complication is a foreseeable risk that can occur despite standard application. 

Is a wrong diagnosis always a fault?
The evaluation is made considering reasonable physician behavior and available clinical data in the diagnosis process. 

Does death after surgery automatically mean malpractice?
No. Fault cannot be mentioned without examining the causal link and compliance with medical standards. 

Can a private expert opinion be obtained?
Yes. Parties can obtain a scientific opinion and present it to the court .

• Analysis based on academic literature

• File-specific evaluation

• Reasoned reporting, not templates

• Methodology suitable for judicial review

• Impartiality and objectivity
   

 Malpractice files require technical expertise both medically and legally. Evaluations not placed on scientific ground may lead to incorrect legal results.

You can request a scientific preliminary evaluation regarding your file and contact us for a detailed expert opinion. 

For lawyers and individual applications, a preliminary examination is conducted over the file