...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Medicine and law >Epilepsy and medical practitioner duty of care in an employment context.
【24h】

Epilepsy and medical practitioner duty of care in an employment context.

机译：在工作中，癫痫病和医疗从业者应注意的责任。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

A medical practitioner who consults with persons with epilepsy has imposed upon him or her a duty of care in accordance with current Australian legal authority expressed or cited in Rogers v Whitaker, but may also have such a duty imposed in a number of circumstances not involving a treating doctor relationship. The requirement for sufficient proximity in legal terms exists where the relationship is not (or is) a standard doctor-patient relationship, but once duty and proximity have been established, it is open to argument, and possibly to future judicial determination, that a higher standard of care may exist in relation to persons with epilepsy, although the law has yet to recognise differing standards. Whilst case law involving claims for damages by workers with epilepsy against medical practitioners is sparse, considerable scope appears to exist for the novel extension of the duty of care requirements of doctors in employment matters involving employees with and without epilepsy.
机译：与癫痫患者进行咨询的医生已根据Rogers诉Whitaker所表达或引用的现行澳大利亚法律授权向他或她施加了护理义务，但在许多情况下也可能具有这种义务，治疗医生关系。如果关系不是（或不是）标准的医患关系，则存在法律上充分亲近的要求，但是一旦确立了职责和亲近关系，就存在争议，并且可能会在将来的司法裁决中产生更高的要求。尽管癫痫患者的法律尚未承认不同的标准，但可能存在与癫痫患者有关的护理标准。虽然涉及癫痫发作的工人对医生的损害索赔的判例法稀少，但对于涉及和不患有癫痫病的雇员的雇佣事宜，医生的照料职责要求的新的扩展似乎存在很大的范围。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号