Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Perineal and Anal Sphincter Trauma pp 178–187Cite as

Medicolegal Considerations: The British and U.S. Perspective

  • Chapter

  • 2384 Accesses

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bolitho v. City & Hackney HA (1998) AC 232, HL.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Chester v. Afshar (2005) 1 AC 134, HL.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Gregg v. Scott (2005) 2 AC 176, HL.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Pidgeon v. Doncaster HA (2002) Lloyd’s Rep Med 130.

    Google Scholar 

  5. When a physician acts as a consultant, courts have found the nature of the relationship to be very fact-based. For example, it has been found that when a physician is consulted by phone, a relationship has been established. O’Neill v. Montefiore Hospital, 11 AD.2d 132 (NY AD 1960). On the other hand, informal opinions are unlikely to result in a duty of care. Oliver v. Brock, 342 So.2d 1 (AL 1976) (informal conversation recorded in patient’s record did not result in physician–client relationship).

    Google Scholar 

  6. There is a distinction between medical and legal causation illustrated well in Hawkinson v. A.H. Robins Co., Inc. 595 F. Supp. 1290, 1315 (D CO 1984): [A] distinction must be made between fact finding in the courts and in the scientific community. In the courts, cases are decided according to probabilities. Probabilities may, in turn, be based upon fair inferences from circumstantial evidence. It is not necessary to exclude all other possible explanations, or to avoid all apparent inconsistencies.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hailsham Chambers, London, UK

    Nicholas A. Peacock

  2. Legal Services of South Central Michigan, AnnArbor, MI, USA

    Kara Jennings JD

  3. AnnArbor, MI, USA

    Kjell Erik Roxstrom JD

Authors
  1. Nicholas A. Peacock
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kara Jennings JD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kjell Erik Roxstrom JD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist, Mayday University Hospital, Croydon, UK

    Abdul H. Sultan

  2. Consultant Obstetrician and Urogynaecologist, Mayday University Hospital, Croydon, UK

    Ranee Thakar

  3. Furlong Professor of Women’s Health Director of Gynecology Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    Dee E. Fenner

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer-Verlag London Limited

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Peacock, N.A., Jennings, K., Roxstrom, K.E. (2009). Medicolegal Considerations: The British and U.S. Perspective. In: Sultan, A.H., Thakar, R., Fenner, D.E. (eds) Perineal and Anal Sphincter Trauma. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84628-503-5_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84628-503-5_15

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-85233-926-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-84628-503-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation