[amendment to last sentence]
Actually, the issue (of liability) should be dealt with by an A&E expert or
prehospital expert, whom the Court would rely upon rather than a spinal
surgeon. The latter could, of course, address causation if one assumes that
liability has been accepted, or partially accepted i.e. I still maintain
that it's most likely that extrication might, at the most, have worsened a
pre-existing cord injury, and that it's unlikely to have caused the whole of
the cord injury, or even the majority of the cord injury, on the balance of
probabilities.
Adrian Fogarty
|