The hospitalist sued in Domby v. Moritz was judged to have met the applicable standard of care for a hospitalist—supervising a patient’s medical care while the patient was in the hospital. Dr. Moritz was not held to the consulting cardiologist’s standard.
Jennifer Aldrich, MD, Jessica Kant, MSW, LICSW, MPH, and Eric Gramszlo
Estelle v Gamble (1976) reiterates that the 8th Amendment to the US Constitution requires adequate care to be offered to all people who are incarcerated.
AMA J Ethics. 2023;25(6):E407-413. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2023.407.
Requirements for informed consent are relatively vague and the exceptions are few, so it is in the physician’s best interest to inform patients about proposed treatment options, ascertain that they understand their choices, and secure their consent.
To be best able to respond if third parties in assisted reproduction contracts break their terms, physicians should familiarize themselves with the contracts, encourage all parties to self-disclose, and, failing that, disclose material information to the other party.
The ambiguity about and lack of uniformity in informed consent practices does not lend itself to the kind of shield from malpractice liability that exists in some more concrete, standardizable aspects of medical practice.
Timothy K. Mackey, MAS and Bryan A. Liang, MD, JD, PhD
Studies show that clinical practice guidelines, used by an accused physician or by patients alleging a breach of standard care, have an impact on case outcomes.
Using evidence-based medical guidelines in courts will require confronting legal professionals' lack of training in assessing scientific evidence, the limitations of available evidence, and fundamental distinctions between the meaning of evidence in medicine and law.
A new Virginia law governing collaborations between nurse practitioners and doctors leaves unresolved key legal issues in team-based care, including those pertaining to medical malpractice and liability and anticompetitive practices.