The Law and Medical MenRogers, R. Vashon (Robert Vashon)
History
The Law and Medical Men
Rogers, R. Vashon (Robert Vashon)
Medical laws and legislation
Subject to the various statutory enactments, every physician or
surgeon, or any one who chooses to act as such, is entitled to a
reasonable reward for his services and for his medicines. If there was
no express promise to pay when the services were requested, the law
implies one: the broad principle being, that when a person has bestowed
his skill and labor for the benefit of another, at his request, and
no agreement is made in respect to them, the law raises an implied
promise to pay such compensation as the person performing the service
deserved to have; and when there is no statutory or other restraint
upon the remedy, an action lies on such promise [18]. The amount, unless
settled by law, is a question for the jury, and in settling that, the
eminence of the practitioner, the wealth of the patient, the delicacy
and difficulty of the operation, as well as the time and care expended,
are to be considered [19].
The law, as a rule, sets no limitation to fees, provided they be
reasonable. Within this rule a practitioner is allowed discretionary
powers and may charge more or less according to his own estimate of
the value of his services. No one will pretend to assert that all
services are of equal value, and no one will claim that those who
can |19| render them the most skilfully should receive only the
same reward as those who can render them the least so. A medical man
of great eminence may be considered reasonably entitled to a larger
recompense than one who has not equal practice, after it has become
publicly understood that he expects a larger fee, inasmuch as the party
applying to him must be taken to have employed him with a knowledge
of this circumstance [20]. But doctors must not be unreasonable in
their charges; as Lord Kenyon remarked, “Though professional men are
entitled to a fair and liberal compensation for their assistance, there
are certain claims which they affect to set up, which if unreasonable
or improper, it is for the jury to control” [21]. That a patient is a
millionaire does not justify an extortionate charge. The French rule
is to consider the gravity of the disease as well as the fortune and
position of the patient in settling the remuneration of a physician [22].
The existence of an epidemic does not authorise the charging of
exorbitant fees [23].
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account