Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Thus, Bolam applies to all the acts and omissions constituting diagnosis and consequential treatment, and Hedley Byrne applies to all advisory activities involving the communication of diagnosis and prognosis, giving of advice on both therapeutic and non-therapeutic options for treatment, and disclosure of relevant information to obtain ...
A standard of care is a medical or psychological treatment guideline, and can be general or specific. It specifies appropriate treatment based on scientific evidence and collaboration between medical and/or psychological professionals involved in the treatment of a given condition. Some common examples:
Medical law is the branch of law which concerns the prerogatives and responsibilities of medical professionals and the rights of the patient. [1] It should not be confused with medical jurisprudence , which is a branch of medicine , rather than a branch of law .
An involuntarily committed, legally competent patient who refused medication had a right to professional medical review of the treating psychiatrist's decision. The Court left the decision-making process to medical professionals. 14th 1990 Washington v. Harper: Prisoners have only a very limited right to refuse psychotropic medications in prison.
The Supreme Court in 1993 extended the requirement that inmates receive required medical care beyond what it established in Estelle. In Helling v. McKinney, the Court considered the case of a Nevada prisoner, "the cellmate of a five-pack-a-day smoker," who sought to be housed in an environment free of second-hand smoke. McKinney suffered from ...
Failure to diagnose: a medical professional is alleged to have failed to diagnose an existing medical condition, or to have provided an incorrect diagnoses for the patient's medical condition. Negligent treatment: a medical professional is alleged to have made a mistake that a reasonably competent professional in the same position would not ...
Starson v Swayze, 2003 SCC 32, [2003] 1 S.C.R. 722 was an important case at the Supreme Court of Canada that considered the legal requirements for determining if a person is capable of making decisions regarding their medical treatment.
In common law jurisdictions, medical malpractice liability is normally based on the tort of negligence. [3]Although the law of medical malpractice differs significantly between nations, as a broad general rule liability follows when a health care practitioner does not show a fair, reasonable and competent degree of skill when providing medical care to a patient. [3]