Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2010] CSOH 104; [2015] UKSC 11 – Page 2 – Law Journals

Consent: Doctor’s orders?

Paul Sankey looks at the recent case law concerning patients receiving care ‘The Supreme Court has rejected a clinician-centred and paternalistic approach to consent replacing paternalism with patient autonomy.’There have been a number of cases dealing with the law of consent to medical treatment over the last two years, the most notable of which is …

Continue reading "Consent: Doctor’s orders?"

This post is only available to members.

Patient Autonomy: Doctors’ duties in obtaining consent

Paul Sankey highlights the ongoing implications of Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board ‘Patient autonomy has largely displaced paternalism. This is a significant shift in the law to reflect changes in contemporary culture.’ A very significant change in the law took place in March 2015 which has serious implications for doctors discussing options for treatment with …

Continue reading "Patient Autonomy: Doctors’ duties in obtaining consent"

This post is only available to members.

Treatment: Life after Montgomery

Sophie Beesley highlights the development of the ‘reasonable patient’ in recent cases concerning patient consent ‘Patients should not be bombarded with information, but helped to understand what matters or is likely to matter to them as individuals, beyond the pure percentages of risk. Dialogue is key.’ Consent to medical treatment is only valid if it …

Continue reading "Treatment: Life after Montgomery"

This post is only available to members.

Case Law: New grounds

Stephanie Prior reviews recent changes in personal injury and clinical negligence litigation ‘Montgomery is a move away from the test of a reasonable doctor and that of a reasonable patient.’ It has been an exciting period in the litigation world over the last year or so. This article will touch upon some of those changes …

Continue reading "Case Law: New grounds"

This post is only available to members.

Book Review: The latest thing

Rachel Heelis reviews the third edition of Clinical Negligence Claims – A Practical Guide Having previously owned copies of both the first and second edition of the book and in light of all of the recent and significant changes in the field of clinical negligence law, I was very eager to read and review the …

Continue reading "Book Review: The latest thing"

This post is only available to members.

Case Report: Montgomery (Appellant) v Lanarkshire Health Board (Respondent) [2015] UKSC 11

Patients’ rights; doctors’ duties; consent test ‘Patients should no longer be viewed as uninformed, incapable of understanding medical matters, or wholly dependent upon a flow of information from doctors.’The appellant, Nadine Montgomery, sought damages on behalf of her catastrophically injured son, Sam, born on 1 October 1999 at Bellshill Maternity Hospital, Lanarkshire, alleging negligent care …

Continue reading "Case Report: Montgomery (Appellant) v Lanarkshire Health Board (Respondent) [2015] UKSC 11"

This post is only available to members.

Negligence: Double standards

Geoff Clarke QC discusses the differing treatments of judgement by professionals at work and when they are driving home ‘Cases where claimants succeed in questions involving clinical judgement are restricted to those where the practice followed is indefensible. If a practice can be shown to be in operation, even if the balance of opinion is …

Continue reading "Negligence: Double standards"

This post is only available to members.