蒙哥马利诉拉纳克郡卫生委员会:最高法院对精神病学裁决的影响

Michael Yousif
{"title":"蒙哥马利诉拉纳克郡卫生委员会:最高法院对精神病学裁决的影响","authors":"Michael Yousif","doi":"10.1177/1356262216666982","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In ruling in favour of Nadine Montgomery in her claim of negligence against Lanarkshire Health Board, the Supreme Court changed the law in matters of informed consent. Having previously relied on the Bolam test of the professional opinion of medical peers, the information doctors must disclose to their patients is now determined by a much more patient-centred test. Despite this, it is not clear how, if at all, the ruling affects modern medical practice. In this article, the implications of the Supreme Court’s ruling for psychiatry are considered. It is unlikely the ruling will alter day-to-day clinical practice. It does, however, serve to highlight and reinforce key principles of good psychiatric practice.","PeriodicalId":89664,"journal":{"name":"Clinical risk","volume":"22 1","pages":"30 - 32"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1356262216666982","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board: Implications of the Supreme Court ruling for psychiatry\",\"authors\":\"Michael Yousif\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1356262216666982\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In ruling in favour of Nadine Montgomery in her claim of negligence against Lanarkshire Health Board, the Supreme Court changed the law in matters of informed consent. Having previously relied on the Bolam test of the professional opinion of medical peers, the information doctors must disclose to their patients is now determined by a much more patient-centred test. Despite this, it is not clear how, if at all, the ruling affects modern medical practice. In this article, the implications of the Supreme Court’s ruling for psychiatry are considered. It is unlikely the ruling will alter day-to-day clinical practice. It does, however, serve to highlight and reinforce key principles of good psychiatric practice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":89664,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical risk\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"30 - 32\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1356262216666982\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical risk\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1356262216666982\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical risk","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1356262216666982","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

在纳丁·蒙哥马利诉拉纳克郡卫生委员会疏忽的案件中,最高法院作出了有利于她的裁决,修改了有关知情同意的法律。以前,医生必须向病人透露的信息依赖于医学同行的专业意见的波拉姆测试,现在则由一种更加以病人为中心的测试来决定。尽管如此,尚不清楚该裁决是否会影响现代医疗实践。在这篇文章中,考虑了最高法院的裁决对精神病学的影响。这项裁决不太可能改变日常的临床实践。然而,它确实有助于强调和加强良好精神病学实践的关键原则。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board: Implications of the Supreme Court ruling for psychiatry
In ruling in favour of Nadine Montgomery in her claim of negligence against Lanarkshire Health Board, the Supreme Court changed the law in matters of informed consent. Having previously relied on the Bolam test of the professional opinion of medical peers, the information doctors must disclose to their patients is now determined by a much more patient-centred test. Despite this, it is not clear how, if at all, the ruling affects modern medical practice. In this article, the implications of the Supreme Court’s ruling for psychiatry are considered. It is unlikely the ruling will alter day-to-day clinical practice. It does, however, serve to highlight and reinforce key principles of good psychiatric practice.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信