A doctor can’t be considered guilty in the case he acts in the manner in accordance to what panel of responsible clinicians considers as a proper practice provided there is some logical base for that view.
This further clarifies that if there exists a panel of responsible doctor’s who may support decision of your doctor, even if they are less in number the chance of success will be less unless their view point is bit illogical. It may be called illogical only if there is no adequate amount of scientific basis for it.
Practically, whether or not the school of thought is proved to be logical is a rare issue.
There is a development in medical knowledge all the time. Standards that are applied to the care provided by the doctor at the time are the basis of judging a doctor’s conduct.
In order to get success in clinical negligence claims, just proving that the error has occurred is not an issue rather an acceptable standard is also a necessity. Proving that an error caused this injury is also a major task in order to get success in claim. Not every injury results from error and not every error causes an injury so it must be well notified in detail.
Tags: , , clinical negligence, clinicians, medical knowledge, school of thought, time standards
