CLAIMS AGAINST DOCTORS

Press, Volume XC, Issue 27403, 16 July 1954, Page 6

CLAIMS AGAINST DOCTORS

British Litigation Causes Concern FAILURE OF RECENT DAMAGES ACTION (From the London Correspondent of "The Press") LONDON, July 1. Many surgeons and doctors in Britain today are alarmed at the increasing number of law suits being brought against doctors on the ground of negligence. Medical societies claim that the State-aided legal assistance scheme and the nationalisation of hospitals have encouraged some patients to become “sue-minded,” and an action for damages is brought if an operation is not completely successful. A case which ended in the Law Courts this week may prove a landmark in the doctors’ recent fight to save their reputation against the threat of continual actions for damages. A woman who had made broadcasts over the 8.8. C. sued a doctor of St. Bartholomew’s Hospital because her voice was impaired after a thyroid gland operation. Summing up after hearing the evidence, Lord Justice Denning said that an action for negligence against a doctor was like a dagger which could wound his reputation as a real dagger could wound his body. “His professional reputation is as dear to him as his body—perhaps more so,” he said.

Always Some Risk It had been pleaded in the Court that the case should be considered in the same way as an accident on the road or in a-factory, said the Judge. On the road, there would be no accidents if everyone exercised proper care; but in a hospital, no matter what care wr.s used, there was always some risk.

Every surgical operation involved a risk, and it would be wrong to say that simply because of a mishap or misadventure, the hospital was liable for damages, Lord Justice Denning said. It would be disastrous to the community if it were.

“It would mean that the doctor, examining a patient, or a surgeon operating on the table, instead of getting on with his work, would be for ever looking over his shoulder to see if someone was coming up behind him with a dagger—a writ for negligence,” said the Judge. “A jury can find a doctor guilty of negligence only if he falls below the standards of a reasonably skilful medical man—in fact, when he is deserving of censure. And negliegence in a medical man is deserving of censure.” Doctor and Patient Relationship Lord Justice Denning also dealt with the important question: “What should a doctor tell his patient?” The surgeon in the case had admitted telling the plaintiff that there was no risk to her voice, although he knew that there was some slight risk.

But the surgeon had done that for the patient’s own good as it was vitally important that she should not be upset before the operation, said Lord Justice Denning. He had told a lie, but the law did not condemn a doctor when he only did what many a wise and good doctor placed in the same position would do. After a retirement of 5J hours, the jury rejected the claim by the woman patient, and cleared the surgeon of allegations of negligence. The woman was ordered to pay costs. With four Queen’s Counsel briefed, the action is estimated to have cost about £3OOO. Most of the costs will fall on the State, however, because the patient had paid £lOO to bring the case under the provisions of the legal aid scheme.