A DOCTOR’S NEGLIGENCE.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLVI, Issue 2773, 19 August 1924, Page 3

A DOCTOR’S NEGLIGENCE.

PATIENT AWARDED £2,000 DAMAGES. Auckland, August 1.8. Tn Ihe Mackenzie case, after counsel's address, Mr Justice Stringer summed up at length. He said a medical man was not required lo possess the highest degree of skill or fo exercise tlie utmost degree of care, but was expected to exercise reasonable, care and skill, and if he failed'to do so he was guilty of neglecting his responsibility. Tt was not sufficient that there should be shown error of judgment or that something better might have been done. Tn this particular ease the defendant was nol responsible at law {or •dial. Tin* jury need not ernbnrrns themselves in regard to Ihe Abrams treatment, except in one respect. Here was a patient who placed herself under defendant’s care and treatment under orthodox methods, to which, according to the evidence, the Abrams treatment was merely an accessory or auxiliary to the ordinary methods. Tt was not n f-U'C in which the plaintiff surrendered herself to a particular method practised by the defendant. Mackenzie also set himself out to be a specialist in cancer and chronic diseases. In August 1022, Mrs Lawrence told Mackenzie that two doctors of undoubted qualifications had advised her to undergo an operation to.prevent the possibility of cancer. That was admitted by defendant himself. It seemed to his Honour that, in the circumstances, this would urge the need for more than ordinary care and vigilance in the doctor who took over the ease. The almost unanimous medical testimony was that if a swelling of the breast in such cases did not re- , c<le, or at least remain stationary, surgical interference was indicated. It was the defendant’s duty to carefully watch this case for developments.

Was he justified in the circum,lances, to let her go away in MarMi. 1023, when, according to his own account, the best that could be said of the ease was that it was stationary; to let her go away without warning that if she did not improve she should either-come hack to him or consult some other doctor? Was it reasonable that his interest in the patient should cease when the guineas ceased to flow from her pocket, which had been depleted? Had he no duty to warn her as to possible- complications? y' The jury returned with a unanimous verdict that Mackenzie had been guilty of neglect and awarded the plaintiff the full amount claimed. His Honour entered judgment for £2,000 with costs on the highest scale.