CONSENT IN MEDICO-LEGAL COURSE

Expert witnesses will know, at least in general terms, the legal test for adequate consent to treatment has moved to that of the ‘prudent patient’ or ‘Montgomery’ test, following the Supreme Court case of Montgomery v Lanarkshire (2015). The test for treatment itself remains the reasonable body or Bolam Test following Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee (1957).

Many practitioners are anxious as to what this splitting of the legal standard of care for consent means for expert witnesses when assessing the acts or omissions of health professionals who deliver care to patients: what does it mean for the quality of information patients now ought to expect to receive when they consent to treatment?

• When should patients have been warned – and how?
• Was a failure to mention a 2% risk of paralysis negligent?
• What can be said about causation?
• What can the expert say about their own practice and experience?

This online course considers what is sometimes called ‘informed consent’ into UK healthcare practice, and what it means for expert witnesses considering what information provision to patients should have occurred from a medico-legal perspective. The course provides 5 hours of CPD.

It is a course intended for experts but will be of interest to all practitioners – whether they intend to work as an expert witness or simply build their wider knowledge and awareness. It is right up to date with 2019 and 2020 case law applying the tests, as well as expert guidance.

The course presenters are Jonathan Dingle FRSA, Andrea Barnes, and Zoey White, all leading barristers from Normanton Chambers.

Click here to view the full Consent Course programme.