100% tevredenheidsgarantie Direct beschikbaar na je betaling Lees online óf als PDF Geen vaste maandelijkse kosten
logo-home
Eerder door jou gezocht
Eerder door jou gezocht
logo
First Class Informed Consent and Medical Malpractice notes €8,64
In winkelwagen
Snel navigeren naar
Voorbeeld
  2.  
  3. The University Of Liverpool (UoL)
  4.  
  5. LLB Law
  6.  
  7. Medical Law and Ethics I (LAW051)

Study guide

First Class Informed Consent and Medical Malpractice notes
 0 keer verkocht
  • Vak
  • Medical Law and Ethics I (LAW051)
  • Instelling
  • The University Of Liverpool (UoL)
  • Boek
  • Medical Law

This 24-page document contains notes of a First Class standard covering the entire Informed Consent topic and the way it links with Medical Malpractice, including the history of informed consent leading up to the current position in Montgomery; causation and remoteness of damage; and defences. All ...

[Meer zien]

Voorbeeld 3 van de 24  pagina's

Document informatie

  • 18 augustus 2020
  • 24
  • 2019/2020
  • Study guide

Onderwerpen

  • law
  • law llb
  • informed consent
  • medical malpractice
  • medical law
  • medical
  • medical law and ethics
  • ethics
  • first class

Gekoppeld boek

book image

Titel boek:

Auteur(s):

  • Uitgave:
  • ISBN:
  • Druk:

Geschreven voor

  • The University of Liverpool (UoL)
  • LLB Law
  • Medical Law and Ethics I (LAW051)
Alle documenten voor dit vak (4)

Verkoper

avatar-seller
dulcieannjones

Voorbeeld van de inhoud

INFORMED CONSENT AND
MEDICAL MALPRACTICE




2019/2020
MEDICAL LAW AND ETHICS I

, INFORMED CONSENT


Informed consent looks to the duty of the doctor to disclose information to the patient with respect to
the procedure to be carried out and the risks of said treatment.

Why inform patients?
o Doctors can avoid legal action
o Respecting patient autonomy
o Enhance healthcare

Why not inform patients?
o The 'time' factor - the duty to inform patients as to all aspects of their treatment and procedures may
interrupt crucial activities
o Too much information can make people anxious
o Medical information is sometimes complex
o Patients do not want to be informed



BATTERY


The intentional and direct application of unlawful force constitutes the tort of battery (Collins v Wilcock,
per Lord Justice Goff). A battery requires:
• An intention to commit the act - it is irrelevant whether the consequences were intended; and
• A direct application of force - there must be some physical touching - this is often not the case
in information disclosure

The tort is actionable per say: the claimant does not have to prove special damage. D is liable for all
consequences of the touching, unlike in negligence where D is only liable for foreseeable damage. This
protects a person’s right to self-determination.

The consent of a competent patient provides a defence.

How much information is enough to render the consent valid and real for the purpose of a battery?

Chatterton v Gerson [1981] –

‘Once the patient is informed in broad terms of the nature of the procedure which is intended, and
gives her consent, that consent is real', per Justice Bristow.

Thus, the doctor is merely required to inform P generally about the treatment. A failure to discuss or
explain the risks of the proposed treatment (or alternatives to that treatment) goes to the doctor's duty
of care in negligence, not battery.

Broadly speaking, there are three types of battery case that can be identifiable from the case law:

Doctor's mistaken belief as to a valid consent

The doctor may reasonably believe that he has a valid consent but, through some error, the procedure
will constitute a battery even though it is the result of a mistake.

, Chatterton v Gerson [as above] –

Facts: The defendants operated on the patient’s leg twice. The first operation was consented to. The
second operation that the doctor carried out was performed without having explained to the patient
why he was operating and what the operation involved. The defendant did this because he assumed
that the patient’s consent to the first operation carried on to the second operation. The second
operation left the patient without sensation in the leg.

Held: D had not informed in patient in broad terms of what was happening on the second occasion.

Schweizer v Central Hospital (1974) –

Facts: The patient had consented to an operation on his foot. There was a mix-up and an operation was
carried out on his spine.

Held: There was no valid consent.

Fraud and misrepresentation

The fraud and misrepresentation must relate to the nature of the procedure. These are extreme cases.

R v Richardson [1999] –

Facts: A dentist was suspended but continued to practice. Her patients wrongly assumed that she was
entitled to practice.

Held: There was no battery. The fraud and misrepresentation was to the dentist's identity, not the
nature of the procedure.

Compare with: Appleton v Garrett [1996] –

Facts: A dentist performed wholly unnecessary surgery for financial gain.

Held: There was a battery. The fraud and misrepresentation related to the nature of the procedure, in
that it was being performed for non-medical reasons.

Chatterton v Gerson [as above] –

Held: "if information is withheld in bad faith, the consent will be vitiated by fraud."

Re T (adult: refusal of medical treatment) [1992] –

Held: "…misinforming a patient, whether or not innocently, and the withholding of information which
is expressly or impliedly sought by the patient may well vitiate either a consent or a refusal."

R v Flattery (1877) –

Held: Consent to sexual intercourse in the belief that the procedure was a surgical operation was not a
valid consent.

Dit zijn jouw voordelen als je samenvattingen koopt bij Stuvia:

Bewezen kwaliteit door reviews

Bewezen kwaliteit door reviews

Studenten hebben al meer dan 850.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet jij zeker dat je de beste keuze maakt!

In een paar klikken geregeld

In een paar klikken geregeld

Geen gedoe — betaal gewoon eenmalig met iDeal, Bancontact of creditcard en je bent klaar. Geen abonnement nodig.

Focus op de essentie

Focus op de essentie

Studenten maken samenvattingen voor studenten. Dat betekent: actuele inhoud waar jij écht wat aan hebt. Geen overbodige details!

Veelgestelde vragen

Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?

Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.

Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?

Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.

Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?

Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper dulcieannjones. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.

Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?

Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €8,64. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.

Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?

4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 71250 samenvattingen verkocht

Opgericht in 2010, al 15 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen

Start met verkopen

Laatst bekeken door jou

Samenvatting ·

(0)

Samenvatting voor de gehele stof van het tentamen van SBG2

Samenvatting ·

(0)

Summary Customer Relationship Management (CRM) CH 1-9 + 11-19

Tentamen (uitwerkingen) ·

(0)

ATI PROCTORED MED SURG→PRIORITY TWO QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Tentamen (uitwerkingen) ·

(0)

Millwright hand and power tools Exam Questions & Answers

Overig ·

(0)

UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON-NEUROLOGY FINAL EXAM STUDY GUIDE

Tentamen (uitwerkingen) ·

(0)

Nursing 5003 Patho Quiz one review updated already passed

Samenvatting ·

(0)

Plan van aanpak & theoretisch kader ; slecht-nieuwsgesprek

€8,64
  • (0)
In winkelwagen
Toegevoegd