alexa Disclosure of material risk as systems-error tragedy: Wallace v Kam (2013) 87 ALJR 648; [2013] HCA 19.
Social & Political Sciences

Social & Political Sciences

Journal of Civil & Legal Sciences

Author(s): Faunce T

Abstract Share this page

Abstract The law requiring a patient to be informed not just of the nature of a medical procedure but also its likely but subjectively significant risks, which blazed across the southerly firmament of patients' rights in 1992 with the decision of Rogers v Whitaker (1992) 175 CLR 479, appears to have now passed to the outer darkness of judicial deference. The decision of the Australian High Court in Wallace v Kam (2013) 87 ALJR 648; [2013] HCA 19 continues the judicial trend to go cool on patients' rights and restrict the capacity of medically injured people to claim redress which was evident in Rosenberg v Percival (2001) 205 CLR 434 and various Australian State civil claims statutes. This trend only heightens the analogy between the law of informed consent and classical literary tragedy. Indeed, heightening the analogy between the legislation and case law on disclosure of material risk and classical literary tragedy may provide necessary insights to bring greater justice to patients injured as a result of medical misadventure and incompetence.
This article was published in J Law Med and referenced in Journal of Civil & Legal Sciences

Relevant Expert PPTs

Relevant Speaker PPTs

Peer Reviewed Journals
 
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700 + peer reviewed, Open Access Journals
International Conferences 2017-18
 
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Annual Meetings

Contact Us

 
© 2008-2017 OMICS International - Open Access Publisher. Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox | Google Chrome | Above IE 7.0 version
adwords