Causation is an issue that is fundamental in both law and medicine, as well as the interface between the two disciplines. It is vital for the resolution of a great many disputes in court concerning personal injuries, medical negligence, criminal law and coronial issues, as well as in the provision of both diagnoses and treatment in medicine. This book offers a vital analysis of issues such as causation in law and medicine, issues of causal responsibility, agency and harm in criminal law, causation in forensic medicine, scientific and statistical approaches to causation, proof of cause, influence and effect, and causal responsibility in tort law. Including contributions from a number of distinguished doctors, lawyers and scientists, it will be of great interest and value to academics and practitioners alike.
This book undertakes an analysis of academic and judicial responses to the problem of evidential uncertainty in causation in negligence. It seeks to bring clarity to what has become a notoriously complex area by adopting a clear approach to the function of the doctrine of causation within a corrective justice-based account of negligence liability. It first explores basic causal models and issues of proof, including the role of statistical and epidemiological evidence, in order to isolate the problem of evidential uncertainty more precisely. Application of Richard Wright's NESS test to a range of English case law shows it to be more comprehensive than the 'but for' test that currently dominates, thereby reducing the need to resort to additional tests, such as the Wardlaw test of material contribution to harm, the scope and meaning of which are uncertain. The book builds on this foundation to explore the solution to a range of problems of evidential uncertainty, focusing on the Fairchild principle and the idea of risk as damage, as well as the notion of loss of a chance in medical negligence which is often seen as analogous with 'increase in risk', in an attempt to bring coherence to this area of the law.
The only comprehensive tort law book featuring real-life federal cases for the practicing pharmacist As tort law and tort liability cases, both civil and administrative, continue to increase in the pharmacy practice, now more than ever, it is imperative for students and practitioners to understand the civil liability a pharmacist may face. Between intentional torts, negligence, vicarious liability, defamation, invasion of privacy, and more, practitioners and practitioners-to-be need to grasp the intricacies of the law in this landscape of increased litigation. Pharmacy Practice and Tort Law introduces students not only to the civil action cases related to pharmacy practice, but also provides explanation on how tort rules apply to the facts of a given case. Each type of civil action is described in detail, outlining the elements that must be proven for successful litigation, followed by detailed explanation of actual federal cases and their outcomes, illustrating how a case can be successful or unsuccessful.
This book presents a logical system of critical appraisal, to allow readers to evaluate studies and to carry out their own studies more effectively. This system emphasizes the central importance of cause and effect relationships. Its great strength is that it is applicable to a wide range of issues, and both to intervention trials and observational studies. This system unifies the often different approaches used in epidemiology, health services research, clinical trials, and evidence-based medicine, starting from a logical consideration of cause and effect. The author's approach to the issues of study design, selection of subjects, bias, confounding, and the place of statistical methods has been praised for its clarity and interest. Systematic reviews, meta-analysis, and the applications of this logic to evidence-based medicine, knowledge-based health care, and health practice and policy are discussed. Current and often controversial examples are used, including screening for prostate cancer, publication bias in psychiatry, public health issues in developing countries, and conflicts between observational studies and randomized trials. Statistical issues are explained clearly without complex mathematics, and the most useful methods are summarized in the appendix. The final chapters give six applications of the critical appraisal of major studies: randomized trials of medical treatment and prevention, a prospective and a retrospective cohort study, a small matched case-control study, and a large case-control study. In these chapters, sections of the original papers are reproduced and the original studies placed in context by a summary of current developments.
Getting the right diagnosis is a key aspect of health care - it provides an explanation of a patient's health problem and informs subsequent health care decisions. The diagnostic process is a complex, collaborative activity that involves clinical reasoning and information gathering to determine a patient's health problem. According to Improving Diagnosis in Health Care, diagnostic errors-inaccurate or delayed diagnoses-persist throughout all settings of care and continue to harm an unacceptable number of patients. It is likely that most people will experience at least one diagnostic error in their lifetime, sometimes with devastating consequences. Diagnostic errors may cause harm to patients by preventing or delaying appropriate treatment, providing unnecessary or harmful treatment, or resulting in psychological or financial repercussions. The committee concluded that improving the diagnostic process is not only possible, but also represents a moral, professional, and public health imperative. Improving Diagnosis in Health Care, a continuation of the landmark Institute of Medicine reports To Err Is Human (2000) and Crossing the Quality Chasm (2001), finds that diagnosis-and, in particular, the occurrence of diagnostic errorsâ€"has been largely unappreciated in efforts to improve the quality and safety of health care. Without a dedicated focus on improving diagnosis, diagnostic errors will likely worsen as the delivery of health care and the diagnostic process continue to increase in complexity. Just as the diagnostic process is a collaborative activity, improving diagnosis will require collaboration and a widespread commitment to change among health care professionals, health care organizations, patients and their families, researchers, and policy makers. The recommendations of Improving Diagnosis in Health Care contribute to the growing momentum for change in this crucial area of health care quality and safety.
The concept of causation is fundamental to ascribing moral and legal responsibility for events. Yet the relationship between causation and responsibility remains unclear. What precisely is the connection between the concept of causation used in attributing responsibility and the accounts of causal relations offered in the philosophy of science and metaphysics? How much of what we call causal responsibility is in truth defined by non-causal factors? This book argues that much of thelegal doctrine on these questions is confused and incoherent, and offers the first comprehensive attempt since Hart and Honoré to clarify the philosophical background to the legal and moral debates.The book first sets out the place of causation in criminal and tort law and outlines the metaphysics presupposed by the legal doctrine. It then analyses the best theoretical accounts of causation in the philosophy of science and metaphysics, and using these accounts criticises many of the core legal concepts surrounding causation - such as intervening causation, forseeability of harm and complicity. It considers and rejects the radical proposals to eliminate the notion of causation from law byusing risk analysis to attribute responsibility. The result of the analysis is a powerful argument for revising our understanding of the role played by causation in the attribution of legal and moral responsibility.
It is an inescapable fact that causation, both generally (in populations), and specifically (in individuals), cannot be observed. Rather, causation is determined when it can be inferred that the risk of an observed injury or disease from a plausible cause is greater than the risk from other plausible causes. While many causal evaluations performed in forensic medicine are simplified by the fact that the circumstances surrounding the onset of an injury or disease clearly rules out competing causes (eg, a death following a fall), there are many cases that present a more complicated picture. It is these types of investigations, in which an analysis of comparative levels of risk from competing causes is needed to arrive at a reliable and accurate determination of the most likely cause, that forensic epidemiology (FE) is directed at.In Forensic Epidemiology, the authors present the legal and scientific theories underlying the methods by which risk is used in the investigation of individual causation. Methods and principles from epidemiology are combined with those from a multitude of other disciplines, including general medicine, pharmacology, forensic pathology, biostatistics, and biomechanics, inter alia, as a basis for investigating the plausibility of injury and disease exposures and mechanisms. The ultimate determination of the probability of causation (PC) results from an assessment of the strength of association of the investigated relationship in the individual, based on a comparison between the risk of disease or injury from the investigated exposure versus the risk of the same disease or injury occurring at the same point in time in the individual, but absent the exposure. The principles and methods described in Forensic Epidemiology will be of interest to those who work and study in the fields of forensic medicine, epidemiology, and the law. - Historical perspective on how epidemiologic evidence of causation has been used in courts in the US and Europe - Theory and science underlying the use of risk to assess individual causation - Primer on epidemiologic methods, and various measures used to arrive at individualized comparative risk assessments and PC - The use of statistical methods applied to publicly available data for ad hoc analysis of PC applicable to the specific circumstances of a case - Background on complementary disciplines, including forensic pathology, death investigation, biomechanics, and survival analysis - Examples of applied FE in the investigation of traffic injury and death, automotive and other product defect litigation, medical negligence, and criminal prosecution and defense
Causation is a central topic in many areas of philosophy. In metaphysics, philosophers want to know what causation is, and how it is related to laws of nature, probability, action, and freedom of the will. In epistemology, philosophers investigate how causal claims can be inferred from statistical data, and how causation is related to perception, knowledge and explanation. In the philosophy of mind, philosophers want to know whether and how the mind can be said to have causal efficacy, and in ethics, whether there is a moral distinction between acts and omissions and whether the moral value of an act can be judged according to its consequences. And causation is a contested concept in other fields of enquiry, such as biology, physics, and the law. This book provides an in-depth and comprehensive overview of these and other topics, as well as the history of the causation debate from the ancient Greeks to the logical empiricists. The chapters provide surveys of contemporary debates, while often also advancing novel and controversial claims; and each includes a comprehensive bibliography and suggestions for further reading. The book is thus the most comprehensive source of information about causation currently available, and will be invaluable for upper-level undergraduates through to professional philosophers.
