Medical Law Review
Latest Publications


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

972
(FIVE YEARS 141)

H-INDEX

19
(FIVE YEARS 3)

Published By Oxford University Press

1464-3790, 0967-0742

2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 755-755

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aoife M Finnerty

Abstract Though apparently in existence across common law countries, the defence of ‘therapeutic privilege’ receives scant judicial analysis in case law. The extent of its reach is unclear and its underpinning justification is shaky. Often it forms a throwaway remark or poorly explored caveat when the duty of a physician to disclose information is being examined, rather than receiving any detailed judicial scrutiny in its own right. Furthermore, despite references to it in case law, it is questionable if it has ever successfully been invoked as a defence in either England and Wales or Ireland. This piece examines this lack of clarity and the often-vague references to the existence of therapeutic privilege in both case law and professional guidelines, followed by a consideration of why the defence may be particularly problematic and unjustified in the context of childbirth and the immediate postpartum period. Considering the dangers of therapeutic privilege in pregnancy presents a timely opportunity to examine the issues with the use of the defence in all other healthcare contexts, focusing particularly on its impact on individual patient autonomy. Finally, this piece concludes by contending that therapeutic privilege ought to be abolished, if it truly exists at all.


2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 593-593

2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 409-409

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward Lui

Abstract Article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights provides for the right to health. Two questions are considered in this article. Does this right entail a more specific right to life-saving emergency treatment? And if so, should the latter right become justiciable in the domestic courts? Two propositions will be made in this article. First, the right to life-saving emergency treatment is a necessary component of the right to health. Second, the conventional arguments against the justiciability of socio-economic rights do not apply to the right to life-saving emergency treatment. Such a right should be justiciable at the domestic level.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bonnie Venter

Abstract In A NHS Foundation Trust v MC, the Court of Protection revisits the question of whether adults should be allowed to act as bone marrow or peripheral blood stem cell donors if they lack decision-making capacity. This case note explores the positive and problematic implications of the case based on points that were raised in the judicial reasoning that specifically relate to i) practical implications concerning the key players in this environment, ii) the risk analysis within the best interest determination, iii) altruism and iv) the wider context as it relates to minor donors who lack capacity.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document