CORE
CO
nnecting
RE
positories
Services
Services overview
Explore all CORE services
Access to raw data
API
Dataset
FastSync
Content discovery
Recommender
Discovery
OAI identifiers
OAI Resolver
Managing content
Dashboard
Bespoke contracts
Consultancy services
Support us
Support us
Membership
Sponsorship
Research partnership
About
About
About us
Our mission
Team
Blog
FAQs
Contact us
Community governance
Governance
Advisory Board
Board of supporters
Research network
Innovations
Our research
Labs
research
Defining deviation: The peer professional opinion defence and its relationship to scope expansion and emerging non-medical health professions
Authors
J Wardle
Publication date
1 January 2016
Publisher
Abstract
© 2016 Thomson Head Office. All rights reserved. The law imposes a duty to exercise reasonable care and skill in the provision of professional advice and treatment on all health practitioners, which in Australia is assessed via a modified Bolam principle. In an era of medical dominance, this standard was clearly related to the standards of the medical profession. However, the evolving nature of the Australian health workforce has fuelled speculation as to how non-medical professions are assessed to be practising in accordance with established standards. This article explores the peerprofessional defence in relation to new, emerging and established non-medical professions practising in areas that were not historically part of their remit, and finds that individual health professions-even those which do not possess traits historically defined by professionalism-have ultimate discretion in determining the standards by which they are assessed, though such standards may be rejected by courts if they are deemed irrational
Similar works
Full text
Available Versions
OPUS - University of Technology Sydney
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
oai:opus.lib.uts.edu.au:10453/...
Last time updated on 13/02/2017