Which of the following factors is NOT needed to demonstrate a breach in a malpractice case?

In a malpractice case, demonstrating a breach involves several key elements, one of which includes showing that there was a standard of care that was expected and that it was breached. In this context, the expectation of care reflects what a reasonably competent healthcare provider would have done under similar circumstances.

To establish liability in malpractice, it is essential to show that the patient suffered some form of injury resulting from that breach—this establishes a direct link between the provider's actions (or inactions) and the patient’s harm. Additionally, causation needs to be established; it must be proven that the breach of the standard of care directly led to the harm suffered by the patient.

The idea of intentional negligence, as mentioned in the option about the doctor being negligent intentionally, is not a required factor to demonstrate a breach in a malpractice case. Malpractice cases typically focus on negligence, which is the failure to act with appropriate care rather than intentional wrongdoing. Therefore, demonstrating that a doctor acted negligently intentionally is not a criterion for establishing a breach in standard medical malpractice cases. This distinction is important as it highlights that negligence and intent are fundamentally different concepts within this legal framework.