Medical law encompasses elements from various branches of law, including criminal law, human rights law, tort law, contract law, property law, family law, and public law. One commentator has suggested that a medical lawyer needs to be a "Jack of all trades." Another commentator has referred to medical law as "an academic version of the cuckoo."

Indeed, until fairly recently, medical law was not studied as a distinct subject. However, it is now widely recognized as its own area of legal study, with an extensive range of journals, textbooks, and conferences. It was recently estimated that over 100 medical law and ethics books are written each year. Despite this recognition, there remains some uncertainty among medical lawyers about what the subject includes and how medical law differs from other areas of law.

Kenneth Veitch has claimed that academic medical lawyers have struggled to establish a niche for medical law and to develop expertise in resolving issues within the subject. It's not just medical lawyers who are feeling insecure; there seems to be a "crisis" among medical ethicists, with one leading commentator writing about "the death of bioethics." Julian Savulescu, one of the world's leading bioethicists, has offered a damning critique of the current state of the field:

"Now medical ethics is more like a religion, with positions based on faith rather than argument, and imperiously imposed in a simplistic way, often by committees or groups with no training in ethics or even an understanding of the nature of ethics. The field has, in many ways, dried up or become dominated by moralists bent on protecting privacy and confidentiality at great cost and 'getting consent,' and in other ways, 'protecting basic human rights and dignity.' Medical ethics isn't sufficiently philosophical, and when it is philosophical, it is often characterized by bad arguments or a narrow range of arguments that seem to make a difference."

One problem might be that strongly held competing views make it difficult for parties to understand each other's perspectives. There is a particular difficulty in communication between those with religious perspectives and those without. Is there a danger that, due to these differing starting points, dialogue becomes impossible? Another concern is that commercialization is affecting ethical discussions. The notion that people might be influenced by financial incentives when expressing their ethical beliefs is somewhat ironic.

The relationship between law and medicine is intriguing. In the past, it was characterized by mutual deference. Medical decisions were seen as clinical matters best left to medically trained experts, and anyone seeking to challenge a doctor's decision in court faced an uphill struggle. However, this relationship has changed.

Courts are now more willing to accept challenges to medical expertise. No longer will courts uphold a practice as lawful merely because it is accepted medical practice. Medicine is also facing scrutiny from other disciplines that seek to comment on what were traditionally considered medical domains.

For example, the question of whether there are only two sexes—male and female—is now hotly debated in many disciplines and is not seen as simply a matter of biology. Scandals, such as those involving the Mid-Staffordshire Hospital (where there were between 400 and 1,200 excess deaths between 2005 and 2008) and numerous reports of abuse of older people in healthcare settings, have further damaged the profession's reputation.

All of this means that doctors are no longer on the pedestal they once were. Now, patients have rights. This is reflected in the terminology used within the NHS, where services are to be "patient-led," and in the NHS Constitution, which lists the rights patients have.

Written By: S Kundu & Associates
Email: [email protected], Ph No: +9051244073