In the discussion on use of non-accredited laboratories Robert Forrest
wrote:
.........
> It is worth reminding colleagues of the basis of an action for
> negligence.
>
> They are:
>
> the existence of a duty of care between the defendant and the plaintiff
> a breach in the duty of care leading to loss or injury.
> it must have been reasonably forseeable that the breach in the duty of
> care
> might have lead to the injury or loss.
>
> And if the neglect leads to death and the extent of the neglect is such
> that
> mere monetary compensation will not suffice you then have the elements of
> gross negligence manslaughter.
>
.......................
> Robert Forrest
>
Where would we stand if we were unable to supply a level of care that is
adequate because of resource/workload mismatch?
Who would have to answer to the manslaughter charge - the consultant or the
employer?
Trevor Tickner,
Norwich
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and is intended
only for the named recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient you
must not copy, distribute, or take any action or reliance on it. If you have
received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender. Any unauthorised
disclosure of the information contained in this e-mail is strictly
prohibited.
------ACB discussion List Information--------
This is an open discussion list for the academic and clinical
community working in clinical biochemistry.
Please note, archived messages are public and can be viewed
via the internet. Views expressed are those of the individual and
they are responsible for all message content.
ACB Web Site
http://www.acb.org.uk
List Archives
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/ACB-CLIN-CHEM-GEN.html
List Instructions (How to leave etc.)
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/
|