Medical malpractice attorneys represent patients each year that suffer the often lasting effects of surgical fires. Sometimes, they represent the family members of patients who did not live through the harrowing tragedy. It is important to discuss with your surgeon the risks and dangers associated with surgical room fires.
Operating Room Fires Rare but Relevant
Dr. Nancy Perrier speaks of her first encounter with an operating room blaze;
“The flames were at least 6 to 8 feet high and the correct actions were unknown to everyone in the operating room. The patient survived the operation, but died about 30 days later from complications of a significant pulmonary injury.”
Doctors and the FDA alike know that these events are nearly 100% preventable. That is why they are pushing for increased oversight on the education of surgical fires for operating room personnel.
Just last month, the FDA hosted a special workshop to looks for ways to stop fires from happening, as well as to offer pertinent medical professionals the tools and knowledge to deal with those that occur.
Experts have estimated that about 650 operating room fires are sparked nationwide every year. As previously stated, many of the victims of those fires will walk away scarred or marginally scathed. Others, however, will lose their lives.
Dr. David Cowles, an anesthesiologist who previously spent 14 years as a firefighter and paramedic, knows well the need for FDA intervention when it comes to establishing a medical standard concerning surgical room fires:
“As a firefighter you’re concerned about what’s going to be the safest way to do a dangerous job and that’s not unlike what it is in the operating room, where every day we perform procedures that could be dangerous and we need to explore the safest way to do that.”
Medical Malpractice Lawyers in New Jersey and Philadelphia
If you or a family member have been victimized by medical errors due to negligent or inadequate medical providers, please contact the Mininno Law Office to speak with a medical malpractice attorney. You may also call for a free case evaluation and consultation at (856) 833-0600 in New Jersey and (215) 567-2380 in Philadelphia.
Let our professionals earn you your just and due compensation.

Some lawyers who have represented defendants in these sorts of cases have come forth with surprising, if not shocking, legal arguments to avoid liability. Some attorneys in this situation have argued that there can not possibly be negligence because that tort requires a duty and a breach of duty. The argument follows that a defendant could not have possibly had a duty of care towards a being that is not yet born. This approach is very rarely accepted because it sets forth bad public policy and it tends to disregard the values we tend to hold as a society. Negligence that harms an unborn baby is just as undesirable as 

Under the respondeat superior theory, a theory that applies to many employer/employee relationships, the healthcare provider must be employed by the hospital. In order for a hospital to be liable under respondeat superior, the negligence must occur
The main goal is to determine whether the law is truly holding only negligent doctors liable while finding that on occasion, bad results do occur in the medical profession even when good doctors are providing treatment. Lawyers believe that the possibility of legal resolutions and potential lawsuits should result in doctors using safer procedures, better diagnostic tests, and more extensive fact finding before providing treatment. The law should also urge doctors to follow the “customary practice” standard which would discourage doctors from using untried and dangerous treatments as opposed to what is generally acceptable in the field. Finally, it is the hope of patients and medical malpractice attorneys alike that the possibility of a lengthy litigation process will push doctors to adapt and change with the profession rather than sticking with their old ways when new approaches are readily available.
Expert testimony is not necessary to prove a plaintiff’s case when the negligent conduct of the doctor was a matter of common knowledge. One example that constitutes a “matter of common knowledge” is all too frequent in medical treatment today. This example involves a surgeon who negligently leaves a foreign object inside of a patient, such as a sponge, following a medical procedure. Expert testimony is not necessary to prove that the doctor breached his duty to the patient when he began the procedure. A layperson 