"can you state that beyond any reasonable doubt that baby A's CP was NOT caused by malpractice
You're mis-stating the burden of proof. Not once, but twice.
First, in a civil trial, the burden of proof is NOT "beyond a reasonable doubt", which is an extremely high standard used ONLY in criminal trials. In a civil trial, the burden is "preponderance of the evidence," "more likely than not." In some states, it's 51%-49%, in some, it's whatever causes the scales to tip from equipoise, more than 50%, but not 51%. A feather would cause the scales to tip from equipoise. If you are at equipoise, you must find for the defendant.
Second, you are mis-allocating the burden of proof to the defendant, not the plaintiff. The plaintiff must prove that malpractice DID happen.
The question is, "do you have an opinion, within a reasonable degree of medical certainty, whether X act DID cause Y result?"
I apologize for being rude. After I thought about it, I wanted to edit my remarks but the edit window had passed.
I've got a lot of health care providers in my family, doctors, dentists, nurses, nurse practitioners. There have been a couple of lawsuits, no findings of negligence, so far. Unfortunately, being a wonderful health care provider 99.99% of the time doesn't save you when you screw up just once. |
