> Of course by using the term 'Paramedic' I would argue
> that you are holding yourself out to have the skills
> of a Paramedic which are now much more clearly defined
> than previously. Therefore to fall below that skill
> level which could reasonably be expected of a
> 'Paramedic' would create liability in negligence,
> hence the previous note about the relatives.
My understanding is that the relevant judgement here is Brogan v Bennett:
'(the practitioner) is not expected to employ the degree of skill which
would be expected from a qualified man. He is only liable for failure to
employ such skill as he said he had.' A subtle difference, but a difference
nonetheless.
What degree of skill someone is claiming to have by describing themself as a
paramedic is open to debate.
md
|