The Medico-legal journal
-
The Medico-legal journal · Jun 2021
EditorialDo recipients of the first dose of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine in December have a legal case against the UK government's decision to postpone their second dose?
The Covid-19 pandemic in the UK has been greatly worsened by the mutation of the virus, which began in the South East and was rapidly spreading and in danger of overwhelming the NHS as hospital admissions and deaths continued to rise. In consequence, the Chief Medical Officers of all four nations supported the UK government's sudden decision to delay the second dose of the Pfizer/BioNtech and Oxford/AstraZeneka vaccines for 12 weeks (instead of 3) so that more people in the most vulnerable population groups would receive a first dose and some immunity sooner. The expectation is that this strategy would reduce hospital admissions and deaths. This article considers key medical and legal issues arising from this decision and discusses inter alia rationing of scarce resources, fairness, whether it is for the greater good, consent, individual human rights, negligence and claims for potential or actual injury.
-
The Medico-legal journal · Dec 2020
Case ReportsQuarantine of the Covid-19 pandemic in suicide: A psychological autopsy.
The epidemiology of suicide has identified numerous psychiatric and occupational risk factors. The circumstances surrounding a suicide are fundamental to determining whether its characteristics will play a crucial role in the decision-making process. The state of emergency arising from the Covid-19 pandemic has introduced a new element, given the general concern and feelings of alarm which are global. ⋯ We set out to consider how far this together with other factors may induce suicide. The literature does not as yet offer us a retrospective analysis of the influence of the global pandemic state on rates of suicide. Accordingly, we report a forensic case and examine the critical issues and problems in the management of these cases.
-
During the Covid-19 pandemic, many countries around the world are considering whether and how to provide liability protection to front-line healthcare staff. The guiding principle of liability protection for physicians and others is to ensure that, in a serious emergency situation, health professionals can devote themselves exclusively to their work and to patient care, without the fear of future claims for unforeseeable, but above all unavoidable, injury, loss and damage caused by their conduct. Great care is needed to balance the interests and rights of all those involved. Liability protection could have risky consequences with the final result that doctors will not be protected, but institutions such as health facilities will be even if they were in fact responsible for foreseeable and avoidable damage.
-
The Medico-legal journal · Nov 2020
ReviewPersonal protective equipment and personal cooling garments to reduce heat-related stress and injuries.
Use of appropriate personal protective equipment is essential for healthcare workers when dealing with patients who have tested positive or are suspected of having Covid-19. Personal protective equipment is uncomfortable at best. In hot countries (like India) or in a hot place of work, its wearers are at a high risk of heat-related illnesses. ⋯ In a severe form, this can result in heat stroke and a collapse while on duty. Preventive measures are needed to protect healthcare workers. This review aims to highlight the efficacy and applicability of personal cooling garments.
-
The Medico-legal journal · Nov 2020
Covid-19 and medical negligence litigation: Immunity for healthcare professionals?
This article considers the recent calls to provide doctors with immunity from medical negligence claims arising out of the Covid-19 pandemic. It provides a critical analysis as to the conditions that would need to be considered for such a policy as well as exploring the wider ramifications.