Your Account
Regulating Patient Safety
The End of Professional Dominance?
This book is currently unavailable – please contact us for further information.
(To see other currencies, click on price)
Paperback / softback
Add to basket  

(To see other currencies, click on price)
Add to basket  


Main description:

Systematically improving patient safety is of the utmost importance, but it is also an extremely complex and challenging task. This illuminating study evaluates the role of professionalism, regulation and law in seeking to improve safety, arguing that the 'medical dominance' model is ill-suited to this aim, which instead requires a patient-centred vision of professionalism. It brings together literatures on professions, regulation and trust, while examining the different legal mechanisms for responding to patient safety events. Oliver Quick includes an examination in areas of law which have received little attention in this context, such as health and safety law, and coronial law, and contends in particular that the active involvement of patients in their own treatment is fundamental to ensuring their safety.


Introduction; 1. The rise and fall of professional dominance; 2. The problem of patient safety; 3. Regulation and trust; 4. Professional regulation and patient safety; 5. Complaining and claiming; 6. The criminalisation of medical harm; 7. Coronial investigations and inquests; 8. Professional responsibility: speaking up and saying sorry; 9. Patients, carers and safety. Conclusion.


ISBN-13: 9781108464888
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Publication date: December, 2018
Pages: 224
Weight: 664g
Availability: Not yet available, will be POD
Subcategories: Ethics, General Practice
Related books
Publisher recommends


Average Rating 

'In advancing a formulation of patient safety that protects both patients and professionals and, at the same time, stresses the importance of the role of professional and legal regulation, Quick espouses a pragmatic solution that can be welcomed by all those involved in healthcare. His arguments are evidence-led and persuasive, while acknowledging the practical difficulties of implementing the change he advocates.' Catherine Bowden, Medical Law Review