DentalHygiene Jurisprudence Article Review
Concisely describe the purpose of the article or why the article was written.
Inline with D`Cruz & Kaney (2010), the purpose of the article is todetermine the extent to which clinicians should disclose risks totheir clients when obtaining consent based on the guidelines issuedby various regulatory bodies such as GMC and GDC. To achieve theintended objective, the authors used Mrs. Montgomery’s claim whereshe had filed a case against her obstetrician for failing to disclosethe risks associated with shoulder dystocia for expectant mothers whomight be suffering from Type 1 insulin diabetes.
of major points
According to the article, it is essential for dentists and other clinicians to ensure that they reveal all material risks associated with the treatment of their patients. Additionally, clinicians have a responsibility in ensuring that they are aware of any alternative treatment methods before deciding on the best approach (D`Cruz & Kaney, 2010).
In Scotland, medical negligence or breach of duty traces its roots from Hunter vs Hanley’s case which involves three distinctive stages. Firstly, it must be established that there is a normal or usual practices (D`Cruz & Kaney, 2010). On top of that, it should be demonstrated that the clinician did not act or adopt the given practice. Last but not least, it should also be confirmed that decision or course of action taken by the clinician is either unacceptable or cannot be adopted by a clinician with ordinary skills when providing regular health care services to patients.
A health care provider is considered innocent if he or she acts according to the practices that are acceptable and have been recommended by a responsible body of medical practitioners.
The extent of information provided to a patient is determined by what the client wants to know when interacting with healthcare providers. In this case, doctors should explain all material risks involved.
Applicability of premise to the dental/dental hygiene profession
Notably,similar cases are experienced in dental hygiene professions. Itsapplicability is demonstrated when dentists ensure that theirpatients are provided with comprehensive details on the informationthat they may be interested to know (D`Cruz & Kaney, 2010).Moreover, dentists should also tell their patients what they considernecessary or details they ought to know. Here, dentists should createan atmosphere where patients are encouraged to ask any questionspertaining the various risks that they are likely to encounter. It isalso crucial for dentists to give advice that is both factual and onewhich takes into consideration the characteristics of the patient(D`Cruz & Kaney, 2010).
Summarize the conclusion of the author/article
Theauthors summarize their article by arguing that patients have thelegal and ethical rights to know any risks associated with variousprocedures that they might be subjected to. Because of that, patientswill be able to make informed decisions. For instance, they maydecide to proceed with the recommended procedures, opt for otheralternatives or even reject any form of treatment (D`Cruz &Kaney, 2010).
Personal opinion/evaluation of the article
Inmy opinion, healthcare professionals play a substantial role inensuring that the health of their patients is not put at risk bypreventing, treating or controlling various illnesses. To do so,doctors ought to provide quality services, reveal all the necessaryfacts and material risks related to a particular medical procedurewhen attending to a patient at their desk at any given time.Therefore, the article was succinct, clear and informative since itprovided a critical analysis of Mrs. Montgomery case and whatclinicians ought to do in such scenarios to ensure patients have theautonomy and freedom of choice when making decisions on theirpreferred methods of treatment.
D`CruzL and Kaney H. Consent-ANew Era Begins.2nd ed. British Dental Association, 2010. Print.