Assessing Criminal Responsibility in Surgical Malpractice Cases

Abstract

Surgical malpractice cases are hard to solve because they involve science, ethics, and the law. Someone is hard to find because of this. Criminal courts deal with acts that were done on purpose or with gross negligence. Civil courts deal with damage compensation. Who is legally responsible for medical mistakes is a tough question that this paper looks at. These include the laws, the rules for proof, and what most people agree on. This study has a direct effect on how doctors are treated in court because it depends on the difference between a mistake made by a person and criminal carelessness. The study looks into many different foreign legal rules, such as how the US defines "reckless disregard," how the UK defines "gross negligence manslaughter," and how Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code defines criminal responsibility in India. One of the biggest problems is that expert proof can change how a case is understood, surgery outcomes are often hard to predict, and illegal penalties can change the way doctors do their jobs in general. Ethical issues are also talked about, such as the problem of whether medical mistakes should be illegal or who should be responsible. The study's main suggestion is for stricter laws, more oversight, and better medical training to help cut down on mistakes and support fair court decisions. The way that law systems handle these issues could lead to justice and protect the dignity of medical practice.