Could The Cold War Have been Avoided
A medical doctor had assisted a lady in labour The Later facts revealed that a few months In of the Childs growth the parents discovered a problem which was very worrying They later learnt from a professional that there child had deficiencies which capped his mobility on the left arm and the left leg Duty of Care: Breach of Duty: The first issue is the standard of care in which the doctor will be Judged on and it is going to be Judged on the reasonable standards of a component doctor. The question arises! How do you test whether an act or failure Is negligent?
The doctor Is to be Judged on the state of knowledge at the time of the Incident.
In this case there Is special skill required In this filed and It would be Judged by the conduct of a competent doctor exercising that particular art. There many Issues In the case arguments for and against:- Assuming the doctor who was present at the time was a junior Doctor:- If at the time of childbirth the doctor successfully was able to assist in the birth of the child and request the advice and help ofa superior doctor then it is mostly likely that he has atisfied the Bolem test even though he/she may have made a mistake.
Therefore we could draw the line that if the doctor had their work checked by a reasonably competent doctor believed that the action of this doctor were reasonable then the Judge may find the doctor had not been negligent. However If the doctor had properly accepted his post In a hospital In order to gain necessary experience then he should only be held liable for acts or omissions which a careful doctor with his qualifications and experience would not have done. Causation: Causation would have to show that a health care professional has been negligent in ome form or another.
It must also show that the doctor at the time of the labour has caused the patient or victims any injuries. The test used here would be the, ‘but for’, test which simply asks whether the patient would have suffered any Injuries. the child by making the mistake by wrongfully applying pressure on the Childs arm or leg. If it had been possible that the doctor would have removed the child without complication then he may have acted negligently and caused the Childs condition. Damages When the defendant has succeeded to prove that there was A duty of care
A Breach of the that duty Which caused the patient’s condition, the patient is entitled to damages Basic Principle in Tort: The claimant should be put back in the position he was in before the negligent act was omitted The aim of damages: not to punish the defendant, ‘BUT’, to compensate the claimant The patient can claim for damages for: Pain and suffering (Relatively small) Loss of amenity Extra Costs (for Example Private care) Loss of Earning Future loses Compensation can be reduced when: Contributory negligence ex: patients does not disclose information