One of the most important commentary pieces I've ever read on informed consent law. Equally so re judicial deference to doctors: "This approach is in line with Bolam rather than Montgomery & reflects her failure to take on board that the landscape of informed consent has shifted"https://twitter.com/louise_austin12/status/935090031340982272 …
>> "McGowan J then concludes she prefers Professor Field’s evidence to Mrs Grimstone’s because her ‘recollection is unclear and unreliable’ whereas his evidence was based on ‘the recorded versions’ present in the medical records" > Hugely significant point vs 'weeding/seeding'
-
-
>> Montgomery was one of the most important developments in consent law in recent years. For this early test case to ignore it & revert to Bolam is outrageous. But it also shows more generally how pervasive the so-called 'medical expert' can be in influencing a judgement, imho.
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.