A heavily debated notion driven from different perspectives has been the role of tort in medical negligence claims. If in both cases a doctor breaches his duty of care and the patient is worse off; what is the difference between 45% - 55% to stand in the way of recovering something the patient held as important and of value? Is it justified to declare one person a remedy and another not purely by their percentage points of recovery when medical uncertainty is a factor? Here, the answer is sought to whether there should be compensation for the loss of chance in medical negligence cases. Gregg is a prime example where perspectives have clashed concerning loss of chance. The 3:2 majority saw no legal acknowledgement of loss of chance but the judgements voiced concern of the legitimacy of the balance of probabilities. Lord Nicholls highlights the arbitrary nature of the 50% barrier restricting eligibility of claimants who had suffered as a result of medical negligence holding favour to patients having “a right to a remedy as much where his prospects of recovery were less than 50-50 as where they exceeded 50-50 ”. A moral consideration but arguments of policy considerations blocks concepts like this. Growing concern for the immunity held by professions saw developments in the law, however the loss of chance is yet to be clarified. The diverse nature of medicine and the hypothetical aspect of evidence relied upon means no one formula will ever be adequate for determining the duty owed and the extent on liability. This is all dependent on the individual traits of the case and the consequences which may be provoked from the judgements. Policy concerns restrict the liability of these professions to protect general interest and prevent ri... ... middle of paper ... ...ilo v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232 Caparo v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605 Chester v Afshar [2005] 1 AC 134 Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services [2003] 1 AC 32 Gregg v Scott [2005] UKHL 2, [2005] 4 All ER 812 Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire [1989] AC 53 Hotson v East Berkshire Area Health Authority [1987] AC 750 Kitchen v Royal Air Force Association [1958] 1 WLR 563 Mulcany v Ministry of Defence [1996] QB 732 Majrowski v Guy’s and St. Thomas’s NHS Trust [2007] 1 AC 224 Osman v United Kingdom [2000] 29 EHRR 245 Philip v Ryan [2004] 1 IESC 105 Ridehalgh v Horsefield [1994] Ch 205, [1994] 3 All ER 848 Sidaway v Governors of the Bethlem Royal Hospital [1985] 1 AC 871 Sienkenweiz v Greif (UK) Ltd [2011] 2 AC 229 Spring v Guardian Assurance [1995] 2 AC 296 Wilsher v Essex Area Health Authority [1988] AC 1075 Statues National Health Service Act 2006
Given the difficulties in the present tort system, we often become victims of the failures of medicine as opposed to beneficiaries of its many successes. Physicians have lost in that they have changed, limited, or closed their practices after having spent the most vigorous years of their lives training for such work. Patients have lost in that the physicians of their choice, with whom they have developed trusting relationships, are no longer available to care for them. It is certain that the system requires sensible reform (p.525).
It is our conclusion that there is today no factual justification for immunity in a case such as this, and that the principles of law, logic and intrinsic justice demand that the mantle of humanity must be withdrawn.” (Parker v. Port Huron Hospital, Michigan)
The narrator in “Battle Royal”, by Ralph Ellison, is too naive and meek to challenge his place in a society ruled by whites. He is a young, black man trapped in a world blighted with social inequality with limited opportunity to advance in life just because of his race. He is torn apart by his grandfather's advice and by his desire to please members of white society. Ellison uses satire and symbolism to depict the narrators struggle for equality and identity.
Medical error occurs more than most people realize and when a doctor is found negligent the patient has the right to sue for compensation of their losses. Debates and issues arise when malpractice lawsuits are claimed. If a patient is filing for a medical malpractice case, the l...
Negligence cases necessitate that the standard of care required of an individual is the same conduct of a reasonably prudent person under the same or similar circumstances. However, a specialist within a profession may be held to a standard of care greater than that of a general practitioner. This also needs to be an objective standard.
Tom Stoppard’s Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead has an overarching theme of fate versus freewill. From the very beginning, when Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are flipping coins, to the very end when they are headed for England to certain death, there seems to be a struggle within the characters between what they can and cannot control. The fact that this play is written around Shakespeare’s Hamlet adds to the idea of fate, as what happens to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern has already been decided centuries ago. Stoppard uses figurative language, such as simile and metaphor, to suggest that no matter how much one tries to exercise their freewill, fate has an uncompromising grasp on everything.
In the play, Othello, by Shakespeare, there is a ferocious war going on. However, it is not the bloody war against the Turks that the audience anticipated. It is a more dangerous war than that: a psychological war that uses a person’s emotional state of mind and biggest fears against them. At the hands of all this is Iago, who stands by and watches his genius at work. Iago’s passion of war is what drove him to commit his acts of treachery, not his jealousy of Cassio nor his loathing of Othello. When he could not set sail to Cyprus with the other soldiers and participate in the war, he found a way to start a new war, one that he could be the general of. Through manipulation, he is able to start a psychological war that ends in bloodshed. His manipulation is the driving force of the play.
Smith M, ‘Patients and Doctors: Rights and Responsibilities in the NHS (2)’ (2005) 5 Clinical Medicine 501
Negligence is a concept that was passed from Great Britain to the United States. It arose out of common law, which is made up of court decisions that considered whether a defendant had an obligation to act with greater care. It is conduct which falls below the standard established by law for the protection of others against unreasonable risk of harm and involves a failure to fulfill a duty that causes injury to another. Many torts depend on whether there was intent but negligence does not. Negligence looks to see whether the person had a duty to act with care. It emphasizes the need for people to act reasonably in society. This is important because accidents will happen. Negligence helps the law establish whether these accidents could have been avoided, if there was a breach of duty to act reasonably, and if that breach was the cause of injury to that person. By focusing on the conduct rather than the intent of the defendant, the tort of negligence reflects society’s desire to
The acquisition of knowledge and the retrogression from man’s natural state are both characteristics of modernity in Western civilization. Writers such as Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Karl Marx, and Fyodor Dostoevsky offer criticisms regarding the implications of these changes according to their respective historical contexts. Despite the continued progress of man since these contexts, the arguments these writers pose are still applicable today. Each offers a different perspective to be critically considered. Their accounts suggest that the burdens of inequality, oppression, and distancing man from his natural state accompany the perpetuation of progress, causing the authors to overdramatize modernity as a prelude to imminent social or political reform according to their various observations of man.
There is a strict distinction between acts and omissions in tort of negligence. “A person is often not bound to take positive action unless they have agreed to do so, and have been paid for doing so.” (Cane.2009; 73) The rule is a settled one and allows some exceptions only in extreme circumstances. The core idea can be summarized in “why pick on me” argument. This attitude was spectacularly demonstrated in a notoriously known psychological experiment “The Bystander effect” (Latané & Darley. 1968; 377-383). Through practical scenarios, psychologists have found that bystanders are more reluctant to intervene in emergency situations as the size of the group increases. Such acts of omission are hardly justifiable in moral sense, but find some legal support. “A man is entitled to be as negligent as he pleases towards the whole world if he owes no duty to them.” (L Esher Lievre v Gould [1893] 1 Q.B. 497) Definitely, when there is no sufficient proximity between the parties, a legal duty to take care cannot be lawfully exonerated and imposed, as illustrated in Palmer v Tees Health Authority [1999] All ER (D) 722). If it could, individuals would have been in the permanent state of over- responsibility for others, neglecting their own needs. Policy considerations in omission cases are not inspired by the parable of Good Samaritan ideas. Judges do favour individualism as it “permits the avoidance of vulnerability and requires self-sufficiency. “ (Hoffmaster.2006; 36)
Numerous inventions transformed European society such as the compass, paper and gunpowder. However, none had the dramatic impact as the invention of the printing press by Johannes Guttenberg in the mid 15th century. The printing press allowed for rapid creation of printed works due to the hand mold, a new technique which used moveable metal type. By increasing the speed by which printed works were created, quantities of books increased rapidly and became far more widespread. By the beginning of the 16th century, over 20 million volumes had been printed in Western Europe and over 240 printing shops were established. Initially religious works, such as the Bible, were primarily printed. Wider access to such materials allowed for individuals to form their own interpretations about religion. Individualism increased which spurred the development of movements such as the Renaissance, the Protestant Reformation, and the Enlightenment. The printing press fuelled an information revolution as knowledge was quickly and more accurately spread. Literacy increased along with education as forms of learning were revolutionized, and the universal language changed from Latin to French. As the printing press became more common throughout Europe, new forms of printed works and themes began to be seen in society. The printing press promoted the development of reform movements and changed dynamics within European culture.
Image appeal means to catch the attention of society with pictures. What image appeal does to our reality, Postman inserts that images does something with the message that we can’t. In Postman’s article “Peek-a-Boo”, he discusses about the commodity that images gives to society. It gives an incoherent, impotent, and irrelevant feeling. He also states that the Peek-a-Boo world does not rely on commentary or explanation.
The Act allows negligence as the sole ground unlike common law which required the claimant to establish ‘fraud’ even if negligence existed. It is believed that the ‘d...
For many years there have been questions circling weather the decision held by the house of Lords in Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC presents the return to Pre-Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562 methods applied by the courts in determining and deciding the existence of duty of care in negligence. In this assignment I will investigate cases and the methods of Pre-Donoghue v Stevenson in setting out the duty of care along with the methods set, fixed and established in Donoghue v