The bocx stated: "Whether you or they like it or not, I have the right to know and if my doctor had a way to detect cancer and he did not offer it to me and I find out I got cancer I would make sure that he understood that he ALSO needed to know and for that I would use my lawyer. Clear?"
You cannot be any further wrong in stating the above. The patient must prove the doctor violated the standard of care. If you wanted to pay for a lawyer yourself, go ahead but no lawyer is going to take a case that is a clear loss.
What is even more important, if a doctor did give a RECAF test and it was not consider a standard of care, the doctor would be liable for lawsuits if the patient was injured from any resultant medical procedures.
IMO, the doctor would be more in hazard giving a RECAF test than not giving a RECAF test.
<<<Negligence
Most medical malpractice cases proceed under the theory that a medical professional was negligent in treating the patient. To establish medical negligence, an injured patient, the plaintiff, must prove:
* The existence of a duty owed by the health care professional to the plaintiff (for example, a doctor/patient relationship)
* The applicable standard of care, and the health care professional's deviation from that standard, which is deemed a breach of the duty owed to the patient
* A causal connection between the health care professional's deviation from the standard of care and the patient's injury
* Injury or harm to the patient
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
