Abstract:In June 2012, the German Medical Association (Bundesärztekammer) published the statistics of medical malpractice for 2011 (published at http://www.bundesaerztekammer.de). Still ENT-specific accusations of medical malpractice are by far the fewest in the field of hospitals and actually even in the outpatient context. Clearly most of the unforeseen incidents still occur in the disciplines of trauma surgery and orthopedics. In total, however, an increasing number of errors in treatment can be noticed on the multidisciplinary level: in 25.5% of the registered cases, an error in treatment was found to be the origin of damage to health justifying a claim for compensation of the patient. In the year before, it was only 24.7%. The reasons may be manifold, but the medical system itself certainly plays a major role in this context: the recent developments related to health policy lead to a continuous economisation of medical care. Rationing and limited remuneration more and more result in the fact that therapeutic decision are not exclusively made for the benefit of the patient but that they are oriented at economic or bureaucratic aspects. Thus, in the long term, practising medicine undergoes a change. According to the §§ 1, 3 of the professional code of conduct for doctors (Musterberufsordnung für Ärzte; MBO-Ä) medical practice as liberal profession is principally incompatible with the pursuit of profit, however, even doctors have to earn money which more and more makes him play the role of a businessman. Lack of personnel and staff savings lead to excessive workloads of physicians, caregivers, and nurses, which also favour errors. The quality and even the confidential relationship between doctor and patient, which is important for the treatment success, are necessarily affected by the cost pressure. The victims in this context are not only the patients but also the physicians find themselves in the continuous conflict between ethical requirements of their profession and the actual requirements of the realities in the healthcare field. But also the technical and scientific progress bear new risks beside the therapeutic successes, further especially bigger hospitals require high efforts regarding organisation favouring errors in cases of deficiencies. Even the increasing juridification of the medicine that is expected to achieve a provisional highlight with the planned law of patients' rights leads to an important focus on the quality of medical care (see also [1]). The explicit legal regulation of patients' rights, which have never been out of question up to now, confirms the impression of patients who have to be protected from their doctors. This development favours a natural mistrust in the quality of the treatment and the desire of legal verification in cases of treatment failures. A totally perfect and error-free treatment, however, will never occur. Already this fact leads to the obligation to do everything possible to reduce the risk to an absolute minimum. The risks that might arise from a relation of treatment are manifold. Not only may the patient undergo risks that arise in particular from lacking or insufficient briefing, complications, or medical malpractice. Also the doctor has to fear legal consequences if he does not stick clearly to the increasing requirements that jurisdiction and legislation impose - not least by the planned law of patients' rights. In the following, the basic principles and particularities will be described that apply for the patients' briefing. Further the different types of medical malpractice will be explained in relation to the resulting procedural consequences. Finally some current problematic fields will be described with regard to other possible liabilities or responsibilities of physicians in hospitals or doctor's offices.

Patients’ Suits Against Psychiatrists for Not Preventing the Patients’ Criminal Acts

[The civil liability of the psychiatrist in Canada following the suicide of a patient: An analysis based on case law]

Regulating Workplace Safety in Psychiatric Facilities

Federal and Provincial Responsibilities to Implement Physician-Assisted Suicide

The civil liability for damages of the criminally insane

AAPL Practice Guideline for the forensic psychiatric evaluation of competence to stand trial

"It's doom alone that counts": can international human rights law be an effective source of rights in correctional conditions litigation?

Death of the suicide law: A changing standard of liability for clinicians

Italian law n. 24/2017 on physicians’ criminal liability: a reform that does not solve the problems of the psychiatric practice

From Operating Room to Courtroom: Analyzing Malpractice Trajectories in Cranial Neurosurgery

PATHOLOGICAL STATES AND CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY

Errors and pitfalls: Briefing and accusation of medical malpractice - the second victim

Managed care liability

A patient as perpetrator of an illegal offence. Doctor's legal obligations and limits of medical confidentiality

[The Medical Expert in the Physician Liability Process: What has Changed Since the Enactment of the Patient Rights Act (PatRG)?]

10 years of controversy, twists and turns in the Perruche wrongful life claim: compensation for children born with a disability in France

Application of the Paternalism Principle to Constitutional Rights: Mental Health Case-Law in Ireland

[Absconding of a patient from an acute psychiatric ward. Whom do the courts hold liable?]

[Involuntary hospitalization and treatment: the interface between psychiatry and law]

Consequences of medical negligence and litigations on health care providers – A narrative review

A look inside the courtroom: an analysis of 292 cosmetic breast surgery medical malpractice cases