The loss-of-chance doctrine, also referred to as the increased-risk-of-harm doctrine, is a principle followed in certain states that permits a patient to file a medical malpractice lawsuit against a doctor, even if the malpractice did not directly result in a specific injury. Instead, this doctrine allows for a claim if the malpractice reduced or eliminated the likelihood of surviving or recovering from the preexisting condition for which the doctor was consulted.
The increased-risk-of-harm doctrine, also known as the loss-of-chance doctrine, is a legal principle in certain states that allows a patient to take legal action against a doctor for medical malpractice even if the malpractice did not directly cause a specific injury. Instead, the doctrine applies when the malpractice reduces or eliminates the chance of surviving or recovering from a preexisting condition for which the doctor was consulted. For instance, if a patient has a 50% chance of surviving a certain type of cancer if it is detected early and treated properly, and a doctor fails to diagnose the cancer until it has progressed to a later stage, causing the patient’s chance of survival to drop to 10%, the patient may have grounds to sue the doctor for the lost chance of survival, even if the malpractice did not directly cause the patient’s death. The increased-risk-of-harm doctrine is contentious because it can be challenging to prove that the malpractice caused the lost chance of survival or recovery. Nevertheless, some states have embraced the doctrine as a means of providing compensation to patients who have suffered harm as a result of medical negligence.
The Increased-Risk-Of-Harm Doctrine is a legal principle that allows individuals to seek compensation for damages even if they have not yet suffered any actual harm, but can demonstrate an increased risk of harm due to the actions or negligence of another party.
In personal injury cases, the Increased-Risk-Of-Harm Doctrine allows individuals to pursue legal action if they can prove that the defendant’s actions or negligence have increased their risk of future harm, even if they have not yet experienced any actual injuries.
Courts consider various factors, such as the severity of the risk, the likelihood of harm occurring, the duration of the increased risk, and any efforts made by the defendant to mitigate or eliminate the risk.
Yes, the Increased-Risk-Of-Harm Doctrine can be applied in medical malpractice cases. If a healthcare professional’s negligence increases a patient’s risk of future harm, the patient may be entitled to compensation for the increased risk, even if they have not yet suffered any actual injuries.
Yes, in order to successfully pursue a claim under the Increased-Risk-Of-Harm Doctrine, the plaintiff must establish a causal link between the defendant’s actions or negligence and the increased risk of harm.
Yes, the Increased-Risk-Of-Harm Doctrine can be applied in product liability cases. If a defective product poses an increased risk of harm to consumers, they may be able to seek compensation for the increased risk, even if they have not yet suffered any actual injuries.
Yes, there are limitations to the application of the Increased-Risk-Of-Harm Doctrine. Courts may require the increased risk to be substantial and foreseeable, and the plaintiff must still demonstrate that they have suffered some form of harm, even if it is not an actual physical injury.
Yes, the Increased-Risk-Of-Harm Doctrine can be used in workplace injury cases. If an employer’s actions or negligence increase the risk of harm to employees, they may be able to seek compensation for the increased risk, even if they have not yet suffered any actual injuries.
Yes, the Increased-Risk-Of-Harm Doctrine can be applied in environmental pollution cases. If a company’s pollution activities increase the risk of harm to nearby residents, they may be able to seek compensation for the increased risk, even if they have not yet suffered any actual injuries.
The recognition and application of the Increased-Risk-Of-Harm Doctrine may vary in different jurisdictions. It is important to consult with a local attorney to understand how this doctrine applies in your specific jurisdiction.
This site contains general legal information but does not constitute professional legal advice for your particular situation. Persuing this glossary does not create an attorney-client or legal adviser relationship. If you have specific questions, please consult a qualified attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.
This glossary post was last updated: 16th April 2024.
To help you cite our definitions in your bibliography, here is the proper citation layout for the three major formatting styles, with all of the relevant information filled in.
- Page URL:https://dlssolicitors.com/define/increased-risk-of-harm-doctrine/
- Modern Language Association (MLA):Increased-Risk-Of-Harm Doctrine. dlssolicitors.com. DLS Solicitors. May 09 2024 https://dlssolicitors.com/define/increased-risk-of-harm-doctrine/.
- Chicago Manual of Style (CMS):Increased-Risk-Of-Harm Doctrine. dlssolicitors.com. DLS Solicitors. https://dlssolicitors.com/define/increased-risk-of-harm-doctrine/ (accessed: May 09 2024).
- American Psychological Association (APA):Increased-Risk-Of-Harm Doctrine. dlssolicitors.com. Retrieved May 09 2024, from dlssolicitors.com website: https://dlssolicitors.com/define/increased-risk-of-harm-doctrine/
Our team of professionals are based in Alderley Edge, Cheshire. We offer clear, specialist legal advice in all matters relating to Family Law, Wills, Trusts, Probate, Lasting Power of Attorney and Court of Protection.
All author posts