header-logo header-logo

NHS Trust: a risky business?

08 July 2016 / David Locke
Issue: 7706 / Categories: Features , Health & safety , Public , Professional negligence
printer mail-detail

David Locke reviews the matter of informed consent, post Montgomery

  • The desire to provide the best care manifests in a wide and sometimes discordant view as to what constitutes informed consent–this article will review some of those arguments and discussions.

A fundamental aspect of the role of a defendant lawyer in the health sector is the dissemination of information concerning new medico-legal standards to health professionals. In that context, I am nearing the end of a long series of lectures to NHS and private health practitioners, addressing the issue of informed consent in the context of last year’s decision in Montgomery .

These lectures have provided an invaluable opportunity to engage with medical professionals. Unquestionably these all have the very best interests of their patients at heart. However, what has become apparent is that the desire to provide the best care manifests in a wide and sometimes discordant view as to what constitutes informed consent, ethically and legally, particularly with regard to the discussion of risks. This article will review

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll