'Grimstone v Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust': (it's not) hip to be square

In 'Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board' [2015] UKSC 11 the Supreme Court redefined the standard of disclosure in informed consent to medical treatment, rejecting the application of the doctor-focused 'Bolam' standard in favour of one focused on what was significant to patients...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Medical law review 2018-11, Vol.26 (4), p.665-674
1. Verfasser: Austin, Louise V
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:In 'Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board' [2015] UKSC 11 the Supreme Court redefined the standard of disclosure in informed consent to medical treatment, rejecting the application of the doctor-focused 'Bolam' standard in favour of one focused on what was significant to patients. In 'Grimstone v Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust' [2015] EWHC 3756 (QB), despite acknowledging a new standard now applied, McGowan J nevertheless used the 'Bolam' test to determine liability for non-disclosure. This illustrates ongoing judicial deference to the medical profession and this case commentary explores that decision and its implications.
ISSN:0967-0742
1464-3790
DOI:10.1093/medlaw/fwx053