Standard of care is the legal benchmark for the conduct expected of physicians, nurses, and other regulated health professionals in Ontario. It is the first of the three elements a plaintiff must prove in a medical malpractice claim, and it is almost always proven or defended through the evidence of qualified medical experts.
Posts tagged Standard of Care analyze how Ontario courts have applied the test in specific cases, how expert evidence is used to define what a reasonable practitioner would have done in the circumstances, and where the standard is contested between specialties. The library covers obstetrical, emergency, surgical, anesthetic, and primary care decisions, along with appellate rulings that shape how trial courts approach the question.
For patients considering a claim, these case comments offer a sense of what Ontario courts have treated as a departure from the standard of care and what they have not.
A birth injury claim alleging failure to discuss antenatal steroids and resuscitation in a 25-week preterm risk situation was dismissed. The discussion was attempted; the patient declined to engage.
A 27-year-old woman died from a missed cerebellar stroke after an ER discharge. The malpractice claim was dismissed when the plaintiff’s expert evidence unravelled at trial.
The Court of Appeal for Ontario affirmed a malpractice trial loss but observed that the trial reasons had not treated the appellants’ claim with appropriate dignity.
Cauda equina syndrome is a surgical emergency. The legal claims that follow are almost always about whether the diagnosis and treatment were timely enough.
A settlement on behalf of the family of a 39-year-old mother of two whose breast cancer was diagnosed too late after a missed opportunity to investigate.
September 2023 coverage in CP24 and the Brampton Guardian of the Thompson v Handler trial decision finding an ER physician negligent for the death of a 34-year-old mother.
A self-represented plaintiff’s Lyme disease delayed-diagnosis claim was dismissed at summary judgment after his sole expert witness was disqualified.
A delayed-diagnosis cancer claim was dismissed at standard of care and causation, with a 40% contributory negligence finding for repeated failures to follow up.
A psychiatrist was seriously assaulted by a patient. The BC Court of Appeal confirmed that hospitals owe a duty of care to medical staff, and that the standard is contextual.
A trial judge dismissed a medical malpractice claim against two ER physicians, finding the standard of care was met and that earlier testing would not have changed the outcome.
A patient’s guide to surgical malpractice in Ontario. The three phases of care, the evidentiary challenges, and what it takes to prove a viable claim.
Three physicians on a multi-disciplinary team failed to obtain informed consent for an elective AVM procedure. The Court of Appeal upheld an $8.5M judgment.
Free, confidential consultations. Paul reviews every potential case personally and tells you honestly whether it merits investigation.