Journal of Bioethical Inquiry

, Volume 1, Issue 1, pp 49–56 | Cite as

Courts as communicators: Can doctors learn from judges' decisions?

The doctor's question: ‘Will I be all right if I …?
  • Loane Skene
Law Section

Abstract

The role of the courts in ‘communicating’ with those affected by their decisions is contentious. Some legal commentators maintain that courts and legislators are able to communicate decisions effectively and that attempts to ‘dumb down’ the law will not make such decisions more accessible to doctors and other professionals. Justice Michael Kirby, on the other hand, seems to share the present author's view that judges could improve their communication of their decisions to a wider audience: ‘In future, it seems inevitable that proceedings [of the High Court] will be broadcast live.Maybe one of the judges will explain the decisions of the court in simple terms as they are handed down… Adaptation to new ways and values is part of the genius of our law, although some of its practitioners need to be dragged kicking and screaming to accomplish the changes’

Keywords

Courts communication Rogers v Whittaker doctors inform patients 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Kirby M. ‘Favourable verdict on the High Court’. Sunday Age, 5 Oct 2003.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rogers v Whitaker [1992] 175 CLR 479.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rosenberg v. Percival [2001] 205 CLR 434.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chappel v Hart [1998] 195 CLR 232.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Naxakis Hospital v Western General Hospital [1999] 197 CLR 269.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Panel of Eminent Persons (D Ipp, Chair), Review of the Law of Negligence, 2d report, Canberra, Oct 2002. Available online at: http://revofneg.treasury.gov.au/content/reports.asp>;Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Skene L., Law and Medical Practice, Rights, Duties, Claims and Defences. 2nd edition Sydney: Lexis-Nexis, 2004, Chapter 1.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bolam v Friern Barnet Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582; [1957] 2 All ER 118 (QBD).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sidaway v Bethlem Royal Hospital and Maudsley Hospital Board [1985] AC 871 at 881; [1985] 1 All ER 643 at 649 (HL).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Goode v Nash [1979] 21 SASR 419.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Albrighton v Royal Prince Alfred Hospital [1980] 2 NSWLR 542 at 562 (NSW CA per Reynolds JA).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    F v R [1983] 33 SASR 189 at 189 (SA SC, FC per King CJ).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Civil Liability Act 2002 (Tas).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Civil Liability Acta 2002 (NSW) s 50.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Skene L. Smallwood R. Informed consent: lessons from Australia. BMJ 2002;324:39–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Young, P.J. What is Reasonable Informed Consent? http://bmj.com/cgi/eletters/324/7328/39#19010Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Skene L, Millwood S. Informed consent to medical procedures: the current law in Australia, doctors' knowledge of the law and their practices in informing patients. In: Shotton L, editor. Health Care, Law and Ethics. Katoomba NSW: Social Science Press; 1997. p/ 69–92.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nickel N. ‘Do Perth surgeons have conversations with their patients?’ Paper presented at Australian Institute of Health, Law and Ethics Conference, Rogers v Whitaker: Ten years on. Canberra, 26 Oct 2002.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sidaway v Bethlem Royal Hospital and Maudsley Hospital Board [1985]AC 871 at 881; [1985] 1 All ER 643 at 649 (HL).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    VLRC Discussion Paper No 7, Informed Consent to Medical Treatment, Oct 1987, p 3, para 7.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    VLRC, Informed Consent: Symposia 1986.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    VLRC, Informed Decisions about Medical Procedures: Doctor and Patient Studies, 1989.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    VLRC Report 24.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    ALRC REport 50.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    NSWLRC Report 62.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Skene L. You, Your Doctor and the Law. Oxfored: Oxford University Press; 1990.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    General guidelines for medical practitioners on providing information to patients. Commonwealth of Australia, 1993. Available online at http://www.health.gov.au:80/uhmre/publications/fullhtml/cp60.htmGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mental Health Acta 1986 (Vic) s 53B, inserted in 1995.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Thomas Addison, ‘Negligent failure to inform: Developments in the law since Rogers v Whitaker’ (2003) 11 TLJ 165.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Teik Huat Tai v Saxon (WASC 1995).Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Causer v Stafford-Bell [1997] ACTSC 90.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Young v Northern Territory (1992) 107 FLR 264; [1992] NTSC 27.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ibrahim v Arkell [1999] NSWCA 95.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Potts v Frumar (NSWDC, 27 July 1998).Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Dunning v Scheibner (NSWSC, 15 Feb 1994).Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Shaw v Langley (QDC, 24 Nov 1993).Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Tekanawa v Millican (QDC, 11 Feb 1994).Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Rosenberg v Percival [2001] HCA 18.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    O'Sullivan v Little [1995] ACTSC 92.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Burke v Humphrey [2001] TASSC 133.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Tan v Benkovic [2000] NSWCA 295.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Reid v Basson [2000] QSC 310.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Johnson v Biggs [2000] NSWCA 338.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Shead v Hooley [2000] NSWCA 362.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Lawrence v Northern Territory of Australia (NTSC, 23 May 2001).Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Henderson v Low and Ors [2001] QSC 496.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Knight v Stocken [2002] NSWSC 1161.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Loane Skene
    • 1
  1. 1.University of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations