To the Editor: The Journal recently drew attention to circumstances in which courts have not accepted professional opinions on standard of care required in negligence cases.1,2 These include opinions formed after consulting colleagues, from doctors trained overseas or unrepresentative of national peer professional practice.
The full article is accessible to AMA members and paid subscribers. Login to read more or purchase a subscription now.
Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.
- Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Ballarat, VIC.
Correspondence: hpeach@unimelb.edu.au
- 1. Katelaris AG. Reasonable practice is not defensive practice [editor’s choice]. Med J Aust 2011; 194: 219. <MJA full text>
- 2. Mahar PD, Burke JA. What is the value of professional opinion? The current medicolegal application of the “peer professional practice defence” in Australia. Med J Aust 2011; 194: 253-255. <MJA full text>
- 3. Linton and Repatriation Commission [2004] AATA V2002/691, s. 9, 11, 16, 18, 19-23, 32-49, 51-56.
- 4. Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 [Cwlth], s. 9.
- 5. Paramothayan NS, Jones PW. Corticosteroids for pulmonary sarcoidosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000; (4): CD001114.
Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.