Abstract

The interface between medicine and the law as relating to neurosurgery encompasses two superficially different entities which in reality have an identical end point, namely, acquired damage to the nervous system. These entities are injury due to accident and injury due to alleged medical negligence. The only difference between the two lies in the medical profession’s perception of the causation: on the one hand a third party is accepted as being responsible, on the other a colleague is allegedly at fault. In both cases the neurosurgeon is required to comment upon the condition of the patient, the relationship between the accident and that condition, and the prognosis. In the case of alleged medical negligence the neurosurgeon is further required to comment upon the adequacy of a colleague’s performance. These aims can only be served by a thorough and totally objective review of the available facts appertaining to the case. This chapter concerns these matters as based upon the personal experience of the writer.

Keywords

Meningioma Hydrocephalus Defend Paraplegia Hemiplegia 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Punt

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations