Medical Negligence: Failure to counsel against a patient who might be seriously ill, against leaving hosital

Question 0

Wang v CSAHS

What are the two defendants?

Answer 0

1. Royal Prince Albert Hospital

2. Super Clinics (vicariously liability for Dr)

Question 1

What is the main case for this example?

Answer 1

Wang v Central Sydney Area Health Service & 2 Others

Question 2

Wang v CSAHS

What are the facts in Wang’s case?

Answer 2

Wang was on the way home and hit from behind. Never saw his assailant.
Went home but not in good condition.
Taken to Royal Prince Hospital, nurse said to wait. Nurse change and the second nurse said the same thing, had to wait. One of Wang’s friends asked if they can go seek treatment at another place, nurse said “do whatever you want”.

They took Wang to Super Clinics. There Dr reviews Mr Wang, gave advice to go back to general hospital to get CT scan and X ray of his skull. They refuse after what had already happened. Dr gave them a list of conditions to look out for and if it did happen to take him to the hospital.

They went home, Mr Wang vomited and they called ambulance, but language issues = delay.
By the time Mr Wang got treatment, he had suffered irreversible brain damage.

Sued Royal Prince Albert Hospital and Super Clinics.

Question 3

Wang v CSAHS

What was the action in Mr Wang v Royal Prince Albert Hospital?

Answer 3

Argued:

1. Early diagnosis could have cured him
2. Duty to advice him that he should stay and advise him risks of leaving.
3. First nurse should have got a doctor to see him before she went off duty.

Question 4

Wang v CSAHS

What was held in respect to Mr Wang v Royal Prince Albert Hospital?

Answer 4

1. Nurse had only function to make a primary assessment to assess urgency of situation and observe him in waiting area.
2. Nurse evidence is that P didn’t have symptoms calling for immediate medical intervention at the time. This was confirmed by Dr Katelaris’s examination (from Super Clinincs).
3. Hospital has no ground to restrain P.
4. Nurse was told they were going to go to another place, she should have offered advice about alternative resources of treatment in case P’s condition deteriorated.
5. It was accepted by the judge (upon evidence) that if P was advised to stay, he would have stayed and his room mates would have supported that decision.

Held: Nurse should have counselled P to remain at hospital explaining why it was in his best interests to do so. Hospital failed to discharge this duty and P’s current condition is attributable to that failure.

Question 5

Wang v CSAHS

What were the arguments against Super Clinics?

Answer 5

That the doctor had a duty to advise Mr Wang to stay where he was and monitor him through the night to see if he got worse.

Question 6

Wang v CSAHS

What was held against Super Clinics?

Answer 6

Doctor had advised them to return to hospital but was met with firm resistance, hence he didn’t pursue it. Evidence given also said that there would have been a long wait at any other public hospital.

He had given advice to room mates, who seemed to genuinely care about the P, and he gave advice via interpreter, evidence that he genuinely worried about P. Furthermore, Dr advised that the P was not to be left alone so it didn’t matter whether he addressed this to his roommates or not.

Held: Unreasonable to hold Dr liable as he was the only one on duty and he had competing interests.
His practice was also not designed as a hospital, more like a first line of diagnosis.

Action dismissed.