Psychiatric Injury Resulting from Medical Negligence

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Standard

Psychiatric Injury Resulting from Medical Negligence. / Handford, Peter.

In: The Tort Law Review, Vol. 10, No. 1, 2002, p. 38-70.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Harvard

Handford, P 2002, 'Psychiatric Injury Resulting from Medical Negligence' The Tort Law Review, vol 10, no. 1, pp. 38-70.

APA

Handford, P. (2002). Psychiatric Injury Resulting from Medical Negligence. The Tort Law Review, 10(1), 38-70.

Vancouver

Handford P. Psychiatric Injury Resulting from Medical Negligence. The Tort Law Review. 2002;10(1):38-70.

Author

Handford, Peter. / Psychiatric Injury Resulting from Medical Negligence. In: The Tort Law Review. 2002 ; Vol. 10, No. 1. pp. 38-70

Bibtex

Download

@article{41ba0ffc1e13475fa2d95a7ea6b832cc,
title = "Psychiatric Injury Resulting from Medical Negligence",
abstract = "Restrictions on liability for psychiatric injury have been developed in leading cases involving rail and road accidents and other disasters. In such cases the parties are nearly always strangers. In medical negligence cases, the parties are in a pre-existing relationship involving the provision of care. Medical procedures are different from {"}accidents{"}, and relatives are not in a position to witness mistakes. The author argues that the rules established in the accident cases should not necessarily apply in medical negligence situations. This applies particularly to birth mishaps, where analyses based on the accident cases obscure the true position of the parties.",
author = "Peter Handford",
year = "2002",
language = "English",
volume = "10",
pages = "38--70",
journal = "The Tort Law Review",
issn = "1039-3285",
number = "1",

}

RIS

Download

TY - JOUR

T1 - Psychiatric Injury Resulting from Medical Negligence

AU - Handford,Peter

PY - 2002

Y1 - 2002

N2 - Restrictions on liability for psychiatric injury have been developed in leading cases involving rail and road accidents and other disasters. In such cases the parties are nearly always strangers. In medical negligence cases, the parties are in a pre-existing relationship involving the provision of care. Medical procedures are different from "accidents", and relatives are not in a position to witness mistakes. The author argues that the rules established in the accident cases should not necessarily apply in medical negligence situations. This applies particularly to birth mishaps, where analyses based on the accident cases obscure the true position of the parties.

AB - Restrictions on liability for psychiatric injury have been developed in leading cases involving rail and road accidents and other disasters. In such cases the parties are nearly always strangers. In medical negligence cases, the parties are in a pre-existing relationship involving the provision of care. Medical procedures are different from "accidents", and relatives are not in a position to witness mistakes. The author argues that the rules established in the accident cases should not necessarily apply in medical negligence situations. This applies particularly to birth mishaps, where analyses based on the accident cases obscure the true position of the parties.

M3 - Article

VL - 10

SP - 38

EP - 70

JO - The Tort Law Review

T2 - The Tort Law Review

JF - The Tort Law Review

SN - 1039-3285

IS - 1

ER -

ID: 479598