The Law and Medical MenRogers, R. Vashon (Robert Vashon)
History
The Law and Medical Men
Rogers, R. Vashon (Robert Vashon)
Medical laws and legislation
It is a great misdemeanor and offence at common law, whether it arise
from curiosity and experiment, or from neglect; because it breaks the
trust which the party has placed in the physician, tending directly to
his destruction [114]. A medical man who is guilty of gross negligence,
or evinces a gross ignorance of his profession, is criminally
responsible for the consequences. And one who, by a culpable want of
care and attention, or by the absence of a competent degree of skill
and knowledge, causes injury to a patient, is liable to a civil action
for damages; unless, indeed, such injury be the immediate result of
intervening negligence on the part of the patient himself; or unless
such patient has by his own carelessness directly conduced to such
injury [115].
It is sometimes difficult to distinguish between civil and criminal
malpractice, or to say when one is criminally, and when only civilly
responsible. But it may be said generally, that to constitute criminal
liability there must be such a |56| degree of complete negligence in
the practice as the law means by the word felonious [116].
There may be malpractice by commission, _i. e._, from the want of
ordinary skill in the discharge of professional duties; or malpractice
by omission, _i. e._, from negligence in the discharge of such duties.
The question, “Was there negligence?” will be answered from the stand
point of the law, not from that of medicine, when a matter comes to be
judicially investigated. The law as applicable to other professions
and occupations will be applied to the medical or surgical case under
consideration.
Strictly speaking, the term _negligence_ is limited in its application
to carelessness in the performance of professional duty; _carelessness_
is its proper synonyme. Duties performed without care, caution,
attention, diligence, skill, prudence, or judgment, are negligently
performed. Acts are so designated which are performed by one
heedlessly, even when there is no purpose to omit the performance of
duty. It is _non-feasance_, not malfeasance. It is the omitting to do,
and not the ill-doing—it is the leaving undone what one ought to have
done—not the doing what one ought not to have done—this last being a
want of skill. In its various degrees it ranges between simple accident
and actual fraud, the latter beginning where negligence ends [117].
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