Approximately 10% of those diagnosed with colon cancer are younger than 50. However, because of the lethal nature of the disease doctors generally agree that the presence of rectal bleeding, even in an individual under 50, should be followed by a colonoscopy so as to verify the source of the bleeding. Just assuming that the blood is the result of hemorrhoids does not meet the standard of care.

Far too often physicians do not do a colonoscopy or send the individual to a gastroenterologist when a patient reports rectal bleeding or blood in the stool. Instead, these doctors just assume that the symptom is caused by hemorrhoids. This is particularly typical if the patient is less than 50.

Let's examine a situation that happens much too frequently. Individuals in their twenties, thirties or forties might begin to discover blood in their stool. Sometimes people in this situation have no more indications. Other times though there might be one or more additional symptoms other than the blood. One such possible indication is constipation. Most physicians would recognize that blood in the stool can be due to colon cancer and that reports of blood in the stool thus should trigger referring that individual either to a gastroenterologist or for a colonoscopy. On the other hand, there are those doctors who without the benefit of any tests ruling out the possibility of colon cancer nonetheless decide that the problems are from hemorrhoids often without even verifying that the patient in fact has hemorrhoids. These physicians regularly assure the patient that there is nothing to be worried about.

Unfortunately, sometimes this person is eventually diagnosed with metastasis, meaning that by then has spread because of the delay caused by the physician not doing any tests when the patient initially informed the physician about the blood in the stool. At some point the person's symptoms may get significantly worse. In certain cases the person may begin to experience unplanned weight loss or might become anemic from the chronic loss of blood. In yet other instances the patient may experience blockage.

This may be intensely painful and may lead the individual to go to the emergency room. The problem is that when the symptoms become so severe that they can no longer be ignored and the cancer is at last diagnosed, it may have metastasized. The likelihood of surviving colon cancer once it spreads to other organs, like the liver, fall to less than 10%.

If a matter like this happens and the individual either has to battle with metastatic cancer or passes away for the reason that the cancer progressed to the point of not being curable as a result of the delay in diagnosis the surviving family may be able to bring a lawsuit against the physician who caused the delay.

The laws of the jurisdiction involved make a difference. For example, there are time limits (generally called Statutes of Limitations) that bar a plaintiff from succeeding on a claim if the plaintiff fails to file the claim in court (and take any other required actions within the prescribed amount of time. Additionally, the standard of care can sometimes vary based on the jurisdiction. What constitutes harm in cancer cases also varies by jurisdiction. And obviously, the extent of the metastasis and the amount of delay is important. If the delay was extremely brief, for example, it is probably going to be very difficult or even impossible to show that the cancer had not yet metastasized or that the person had a substantially higher probability of beating the cancer. Just what the requirements are to establish causation also varies from one jurisdiction to another. An experienced medical malpractice lawyer can assist the patient or the family figure out if they have a claim.