Carney v Newton: expert evidence about the standard of clinical notes.
In Carney v Newton [2006] TASSC 4 the Tasmanian Supreme Court heard a claim that the defendant breached his duty of care by failing to properly diagnose and treat a node positive carcinoma in the plaintiff's breast tissue. At trial, argument turned on the actual dialogue that took place during the initial consultation, with significant reliance on the clinical notes of the defendant. The court gave considerable weight to "expert" witnesses in ascertaining the acceptability of the defendant's conduct concerning the maintenance and interpretation of his clinical notes. This raises important questions in relation to proof of quality of medical records as part of the current professional standard of care, as modified by recent legislation in most jurisdictions.
Faunce
Thomas
T
Globalisation and Health Project, College of Law, The Australian National University.
Hammer
Ingrid
I
Jefferys
Susannah
S
D001315:Australia; D001943:Breast Neoplasms / Q000523:psychology*; D004992:Ethics, Medical; D005104:Expert Testimony / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D033161:Government Regulation; D006801:Humans; D007258:Informed Consent; D007603:Jurisprudence; D007878:Legislation as Topic; D016365:Liability, Legal; D008318:Malpractice; D008603:Mental Health; D013648:Tasmania