Monday 1 October 2012

Emedinews:Insights on Medicolegal Issues:State Supreme Court ruling


 Medicolegal Update
(Dr Sudhir Gupta, Additional Prof, Forensic Medicine & Toxicology, AIIMS) The Delaware State Supreme Court ruling
Physician is not a warrantor of cure or of accurate diagnosis
  • It is not enough…for the plaintiff to show that some other physician would personally have acted any differently than the defendant…or that there is an approach which would be better than that used by the defendant, if nevertheless the approach used by the defendant is regarded...as an acceptable approach…No inference of malpractice arises from the mere fact that there was an undesirable result. Malpractice is never presumed. The law does not make a physician an insurer of the best result of his treatment.
  • The Michigan Supreme Court expressed similar sentiments and emphasized that not all mistakes constitute negligence
  • One’s treating physician is not a warrantor of cure or of accurate diagnosis. He is responsible in damages for unfortunate results when and only when it is shown…that he has departed from that standard of care which is known as customary medical practice…Using the benefit of hindsight,
  • The defendant–physician made one of those occasional mistakes which even the most skilled of professional men do make as they proceed with the trial–and–error work they have chosen. Such a mistake is not actionable in the medical field unless it is shown…that the acts or omissions of accused doctor were contrary to customary medical practice.

No comments:

Post a Comment