The medical body consists of interdependent systems, "causation" is a seriously complicated issue if we are talking about medical negligence. The medical personnel or authorities involved might argue that their procedure and or treatment was not the cause of the injury but that it was instead the ill affect of a medical condition the patient was going through.
IF a patient wants to claim for medical malpractice for any medical negligence, in that case he or she has to prove main three points. First one is that the medical professionals had a duty and full responsibilty to provide a certain rules and regulations and standard of care, which was not folloed and which lead to injury etc. And the second thing is that the patient suffered an injury be it physical, mental or othersie and the third and final thing to prove is that the injury was actually caused and was the result of the alleged medical negligence or carelessness.
Know do you know that "standard of care" varies from state to state. Some laws restrict the medical standard to be followed be the physicians in the same area of the country, while others states may extend the medical standard to doctors on a countrywide level. lets says for an example, a brain surgeon will be held to certain standard of other surgeons in the same field. If he or she acted in a way that differs from the way most brain surgeons would have acted in similar circumstances, that surgeon may be found to have been medically negligent.
It is not only the Physical injury but Psychologists and psychiatrists can also be sued for medical negligence, although these types of cases are much more difficult to prove because not only are the injuries non-physical, but causation is particularly complex.
In any type of case, the attorneys assigned by the physicians' malpractice insurance company will likely try to argue that the injury was not caused by medical negligence.