Objectives: The aim of this paper is to examine the recent decision of the NSW Supreme Court, which considered a personal injuries action brought by a patient treated in the community following a 6 day voluntary hospital admission.
Conclusions: The judicial reasoning in Walker v Sydney West Area Health Service provides some comfort to mental health professionals practising in other jurisdictions whose legislative provisions are similar to those contained in the Civil Liability Act (NSW). In applying the Bolam principle, rather than the higher common law standard previously imposed by the High Court in Rogers v Whitaker, the decision is encouraging for mental health professionals whose management accords with accepted current good practice. The infrequent scrutiny by courts and coroners of management practice and systems in mental health is a further incentive to maintain continuous improvement of quality of care (by clinical audits, active risk management, professional development and supervision, and patient/family participation) consistent with the principles of clinical governance.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Walker v Sydney West Area Health Service [2007] NSWSC 526.
2.
Rogers v Whitaker1992175 CLR 479, at 483.
3.
F v R26198333 SASR 189.
4.
Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582; [1957] 2 All ER 118.
5.
Sidaway v Governors of Bethlem Royal Hospital [1985] UKHL 1; [1985] AC 871.
6.
Hunter Area Health Services v Presland [2005] NSWCA 33.
7.
ScottR. Liability of psychiatrists and mental health services for failing to admit or detain patients with mental illness. Australasian Psychiatry2006; 14: 256.
8.
ScottR. Chappel v Hart: the High Court considers causation of damage from a surgeon's negligent failure to warn. Medical Journal of Australia2000; 172: 134.
