This is absurdly impractical. Are are implying that all telephone advice is
legally dodgy? The upshot would eventually be that ALL OOH contacts would have
to be seen ASAP. Pts. would soon cotton on to this and demand an OOH visit for
anything, knowing that knowone will refuse for fear of m'learned friends.
----------
From: [log in to unmask] on behalf of Graham Ross
Sent: 12 January 1998 15:50
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: NHS advice line: legal aspects
Haines wrote:
>
> If there is no legal framework to protect against litigation for telephone
> advice does that mean that we have all been operating without cover all
> these years?
You have cover in the sense that the Trust will pick up the tab for any
claim. What Ahmad was raising was the point that, given that the risk of
telephone advice being either wrong, or interpreted wrongly by the
patient, and resulting in injury/illness, must be significantly greater
than advice in person and after examination, ought there to be some
legal protection to ensure claims could not succeed at all under this
service. Afer all, why should Trusts/nurses incur that increased risk
for a half-baked service forced upon them?
My poor attempt at humour was to suggest that, in the absence of any
special protection, one way to protect yourselves from claims would be
to tell people not to rely on what you have to say.
Graham Ross
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|