03.08.2013 Views

Public Health Law Map - Beta 5 - Medical and Public Health Law Site

Public Health Law Map - Beta 5 - Medical and Public Health Law Site

Public Health Law Map - Beta 5 - Medical and Public Health Law Site

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

should make sure that he or she can ensure that the patient will not be injured by this<br />

action.<br />

Inadvertent ab<strong>and</strong>onment usually occurs through misunderst<strong>and</strong>ings about backup<br />

coverage when the physician is unavailable. Although a jury will be much more<br />

sympathetic if the physician was unavailable because of a medical emergency, as<br />

opposed to a social event, the reason makes little difference to the patient in need of<br />

care. Many physicians would never go to a party without arranging to receive their<br />

calls or providing someone else to cover emergencies, but they may become involved<br />

in lengthy hospital procedures that render them unavailable without arranging any<br />

coverage.<br />

Failure of the system for backup coverage can result in constructive ab<strong>and</strong>onment. A<br />

physician who is part of a group that shares calls on a set schedule can get in trouble<br />

if the person on call does not show up. The physician’s duty is to his or her patient. If<br />

the patient is injured because of a problem with the call schedule, it is the patient’s<br />

original physician, not the on-call physician, who is ultimately liable. It is important<br />

to verify call arrangements each time, rather than relying on habit or custom.<br />

Patients may be ab<strong>and</strong>oned through failures in the scheduling system. The<br />

appointment clerk may functionally ab<strong>and</strong>on a patient by refusing to let a patient talk<br />

to the medical personnel, by scheduling an appointment too far in the future, or by<br />

filing away the chart of a patient who failed to keep an important follow-up<br />

appointment.<br />

2. Patient-Initiated Terminations<br />

In the simplest scenario, the patient voluntarily terminates the physician–patient<br />

relationship <strong>and</strong> seeks care from another physician. Unfortunately, patients<br />

sometimes stop coming before they are fully recovered from the acute condition that<br />

brought them to the physician. When this happens, the physician must make some<br />

effort to determine whether the patient is knowingly forgoing further care, has found<br />

another physician, or is staying away out of ignorance or a misunderst<strong>and</strong>ing of the<br />

physician’s instructions. As discussed later under “documentation,” the process of<br />

investigating the patient’s disappearance also generates the necessary record that the<br />

physician has discharged the duty to the patient.<br />

An adult patient has the right to refuse to follow the physician’s advice. If this person<br />

underst<strong>and</strong>s the need for further treatment <strong>and</strong> the consequences of not having that<br />

treatment, the physician has no legal liability for the patient’s subsequent course.<br />

(The physician’s duty is different for minor <strong>and</strong> incompetent patients.) The problem<br />

arises in establishing what the patient was told. A jury will presume that a severely<br />

injured patient would not have refused to follow the physician’s instructions if he or<br />

she had understood the consequences of the refusal. An example of this problem<br />

arose when a woman died of cervical cancer <strong>and</strong> her family sued the physician for<br />

failure to diagnose. [Truman v. Thomas, 611 P.2d 902 (Cal. 1980).] The physician<br />

argued that she had refused a Pap smear, <strong>and</strong> this prevented him from making a<br />

247

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!