Legal Medicine in the 21st Century Australia - How Things are Changing

Abstract

Moving from the 20th to 21st century witnessed significant change in the doctor-patient relationship and tort law within legal medicine. The 20th century was a period of widely accepted paternalistic, doctor-centric medicine, although there was an emerging questioning of doctors' advice. This culminated with Rogers v Whitaker and a growing propensity for patients to litigate against doctors, resulting in large, Court-imposed settlements and the indemnity crisis. This provoked the commissioning of the Ipp Report, legislative change, tort law reform and the Civil Liability Act 2002 with its various forms throughout Australia. More recently, the Courts have become more doctor-friendly, but this has not necessarily translated into patients being more accepting. Patient-centric medicine has resulted in patients resorting to the electronic media, in deference to the information provided by their doctor, with unreal expectations. Some patients believe that medicine has so advanced that all negative outcomes must be as a consequence of negligence or malpractice. Bypassing traditional modes of complaints, some have chosen very aggressive attacks on their doctors' reputation, via social media, to the point that doctors have litigated against their patients and even taken out an Apprehended Violence Order. 21st century legal medicine has moved from paternalistic, doctor-centric healthcare to a more aggressive form of consumerism. Patient-centric medicine and the use of social media have necessitated doctors litigating against patients, something unheard of in the 20th century.