Upending the medical duty to advise: Legislating the standard of care in Singapore

The standard of care to which doctors are held in medical practice is based on the peer professional standard in most common law jurisdictions. However, when it comes to the duty to inform the patient of risks in proposed treatment, courts across the common law world have adopted a prudent patient s...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Medical law international 2022-09, Vol.22 (3), p.189-216
Main Author: Amirthalingam, Kumaralingam
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Autonomy
Courts
Health services
Jurisdiction
Medical negligence
Negligence
Physicians
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The standard of care to which doctors are held in medical practice is based on the peer professional standard in most common law jurisdictions. However, when it comes to the duty to inform the patient of risks in proposed treatment, courts across the common law world have adopted a prudent patient standard to strike a better balance between beneficence and autonomy. Instead of allowing doctors to control the information provided, courts assess what risks are material to a reasonable patient. Singapore is the most recent jurisdiction to follow suit, but the common law development may be short-lived following legislative intervention. This article critically analyses the law on the standard of care in medical negligence, arguing that the legislative reform was based on a misconception of the law. It highlights some of the potential difficulties in implementing the legislative framework.
ISSN:0968-5332
2047-9441
DOI:10.1177/09685332221103553