Protective Legislation For The Elderly Case Study

1546 Words 7 Pages
Australia’s aging population amplifies the fact that protective legislation for the elderly must be introduced.

Question 7:
Refer to both the Consent to Medical Treatment and Palliative Care Act 1995 (SA) and the AHPRA Code of Conduct to explain why medical practitioners and others are obliged to explain to patients/clients the consequences of proposed treatments. Medical practitioners and other health care professionals are obligated to explain to patients/clients the consequences of proposed treatments in order to enable them to make an informed decision and made aware of any material risks that are associated with any part of the proposed management plan (Code, section 3.3(d)(e)(g), page 10) (CMT&PCA (s15)).

Question 8:
‘There is no
…show more content…
His finding within the case was that the nursing home would not be in any way negligent in allowing a competent patient to refuse further treatment (Brightwater Care Group (2009)).

(iii) Why didn’t section 262 of the Criminal Code Act 1913 (WA) apply to Mr Rossiter?

The Act did not apply to Mr Rossiter he was not cognitively infirm (LN 4&5, page 5).

Question 10:
What lesson does the case of Hart v Herron (1984) Aust Torts Report 80-201 teach to health practitioners about their acceptance of implied consent?

Hart v Herron taught health practitioners that although implied consent is often accepted as valid consent, caution is still necessary. For example, attendance at the hospital does not constitute consent to treatment (LN 4&5, page 16).

Question 11:
(i) Are documents created as advance care directives in states and territories other than South Australia, recognized in South Australia?

Yes, documents created as the equivalent to the South Australian advance care directives that have been made under interstate law are recognised in South Australia and are treated as if they were advance care directives made under the Advance Care Directives Act 2013 (SA) (ACDA (s33)(2)(a),reg
…show more content…
The standard of care the court will apply will be the widely accepted standard of competent professional practice in Australia by members of the same profession (CLA (s41(1)).

(ii) If the surgeon’s legal counsel calls witnesses who testify truthfully that her techniques were widely but not universally accepted, would that information help to rebut the allegation?

Yes, that information would help to rebut the allegation as professional opinion does not have to be universally accepted to be considered widely accepted (CLA (s41(4)).

(iii) Will proof that something was a widely accepted practice among neurosurgeons also help to rebut an allegation of negligence if the practice in question was one around information giving to patients in preparation for an elective surgical procedure?

No, the proof that something was widely accepted practice will not help rebut an allegation of negligence if the practice in question was around information giving to patients in preparation of an elective surgical procedure, as the standard of care for professions does not apply to the liability arising in connection with the giving of a warning, advice or other information in respect of a risk of death of or injury associated with the provision of a health care service (CLA

Related Documents