header-logo header-logo

The last word on consent?

02 April 2015 / Charles Foster
Issue: 7647 / Categories: Features , Professional negligence
printer mail-detail
nlj_7647_charles-foster

Montgomery is the belated obituary, not the death knell, of medical paternalism, says Charles Foster

Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] UKSC 11, [2015] All ER (D) 113 (Mar) concerned a pregnant diabetic patient who was not warned by her consultant obstetrician about the risk that her baby, being large relative to the size of the mother’s pelvis, would have shoulder dystocia. The obstetrician thought that the mother would, if given the relevant statistics about the risk, opt for a Caesarean section. That, the obstetrician decided, would not be in the mother’s best interests: the mother would, in effect, make an objectively wrong decision about the risks of serious injury. By not providing the information, the obstetrician was protecting the patient against her own irrationality. The Supreme Court decided that, even though there were some obstetricians who would adopt that approach, the health board that employed the obstetrician was liable. The Bolam test had no place in the consideration of such cases. It adopted wholesale the decision of the High Court of Australia in Rogers v Whittaker [1992] HCA 58, (1992) 175

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll