"Tort of Trespass" in medical law

[evedawn]

hello all - hope you are all good.

I am studying today(AMSPAR exam in June) and wonder if someone can help explain the following:

The "Tort of Trespass to the person with reference to the consent of treatment by the individual"

It's not phrased great I know:

I know that a "Tort" is a Civil Law.

I understand that "Trespass" is unlawful access to an area...in this case the patients body.

The way I undersatnd the Q is: There is a breach of civil law if a patient has not given consent to aparticular treatment / procedure.

AM I right - or is there more?

[boxtops]

Informed consent is an important area in medical law, I work with people who are employed in GP practices and obtaining patient consent for any invasive procedure is really important, otherwise as you say there has been a breach.

the attached paper from NICE might be helpful:
http://www.cks.nhs.uk.../consent_to_treatment

If you Google Patient Consent you will find lots of other links.

Good luck with your course - is it the Med Sec certificate/diploma which you are following?

[evedawn]

Thanks box - you've answered quite a few of my Q's lately :-)

Yes it's the Diplma course. I'm doing some of it self - study (done the med terminology level 3 already) and doing the legal aspects of practice administration in June. .

I already work for a GP - but I want to get ahead and "move on" and this (for me) is the way to go I think.

I will check out that link shortly - thanks again!.

[boxtops]

Good luck evedawn, give us a shout if there is anything else I might be able to help with. AMSPAR do a practice manager qualification too, when/if you want to move on that far.... and the AMSPAR MedSec diploma will be valuable if you wanted to move into another setting across the NHS in future, it's recognised as a good benchmark.

[evedawn]

Thanks - may just "pick your brains" some more :-)

Yes I want to move onwards (and stay within NHS) but away from the GP surgery. Went for an interview last week (which you kindly gave me advice about). I didn't get the job but got such good feedback from interviewers that I didn't feel it was a waste at all.

All the best - I have to give the studying a break now and make some lunch...

[boxtops]

Great - I have tagged this thread so if you want to get in touch again, if there is anything I can try to answer, please just add to this one and AB will alert me!

[Gmcd01]

You're 90% of the way there, I'd say. The main quote to remember is from a persuasive US case, Shloendorf (sic?), per Justice Cardozo: "Every human being, of sound mind and adult years, has a right to determine what shall be done with his body".
There could be a breach of civil law, but it could also be a criminal offence. It could be a sexual offence, an offence against a minor, or an assault/ABH/GBH. Torts are civil, but they can lapse into criminal behaviour- I'm thinking of theft (the tort of conversion), so the two are rarely far apart.

That said, you should also be aware of differing forms of consent and what is required. Does silence imply consent? Must consent be informed, express or implied? How much does the doctor need to tell the patient for 'informed consent' to be found?
There was a case where non-disclosure of a 1% risk of vocal chord paralysis was informed consent (the patient was a BBC voiceover). Also, there's been cases on bodily paralysis etc.
There's also a whole body of thought on consent for/from minors too. The whole area is really a legal minefield for the unwary.
So the summarise, you seem to know your stuff, but for me, the main body of argument will lie in what 'consent' means.