NEGLIGENT DOCTORS SIR,—Pharos is as wrong as he can be
in his comments on doctors who have been fined for negligence and whose names are not revealed. He implies that some doctors may be protected from the legal consequences of their actions— even criminal actions. The position is that doctors are subjected with great and increasing regularity to litigious scrutiny but as well as this, the doctor in the NHS has to comply with his 'terms of service'. The compliance or non-com- pliance with these terms may or may not have any relation to liability at law— for example, if I find myself faced with a particularly tiresome waiting-room of patients, I may attend to them by grab- bing -my kukri and cutting off all their heads. This would not constitute a breach in my terms of service but if, however, I restrained my murderous intent and refused to see them, I would be guilty of a breach of service.
The function of the administrative tribunals is to see that the terms laid down have been followed and the warn- ings, fines, etc., are therefore very often for reasons unconnected with legal responsibility and where there is legal action, there may be tribunal action as well. A doctor in private practice has no such terms to comply with, but for most of us, we have responsibilities to the State service and becaUse we may be found guilty of a breach in terms of service, it is unjust to infer that this shelters us from legal consequences.— Yours faithfully, Rounds, Northants.
ALASTAIR A. MCINNES
Previous page
