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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll