What is the standard of care of a gynaecologist and obstetrician?

British Columbia, Canada


The following excerpt is from Aldcroft v. Dr. Christopher D. Cameron, Dr. Peter A. Gutmanis and Nanaimo General Hospital, 2004 BCSC 1624 (CanLII):

In addressing this issue, it is useful to consider the standard of care as set out in ter Neuzen v. Korn (1995), 1995 CanLII 72 (SCC), 127 D.L.R. (4th) 577, [1995] 3 S.C.R. 674 at ¶33: It is well settled that physicians have a duty to conduct their practice in accordance with the conduct of a prudent and diligent doctor in the same circumstances. In the case of a specialist, such as a gynaecologist and obstetrician, the doctor’s behaviour must be assessed in light of the conduct of other ordinary specialists, who possess a reasonable level of knowledge, competence and skill expected of professionals in Canada, in that field. A specialist, such as the respondent, who holds himself out as possessing a special degree of skill and knowledge, must exercise the degree of skill of an average specialist in his field [references omitted].

In Wilson v. Swanson, 1956 CanLII 1 (SCC), [1956] S.C.R. 804, 5 D.L.R. (2d) 113, Rand J. stated at pp. 811-812: What the surgeon by his ordinary engagement undertakes with the patient is that he possesses the skill, knowledge and judgment of the generality or average of the special group or class of technicians to which he belongs and will faithfully exercise them. In a given situation some may differ from others in that exercise, depending on the significance they attribute to the different factors in the light of their own experience. The dynamics of the human body of each individual are themselves individual and there are lines of doubt and uncertainty at which a clear course of action may be precluded. There is here only the question of judgment; what of that? That test can be no more than this: was the decision the result of the exercise of the surgical intelligence professed? Or was what was done such that, disregarding it may be the exceptional case or individual, in all the circumstances, at least the preponderant opinion of the group would have been against it? If a substantial opinion confirms it, there is no breach or failure.

Other Questions


What is the significance of the relative standard of living of the parties post post post-war compared to the standard living standard in their respective countries? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the current standard for determining if a motorist has acted accordance with the requisite standard? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the current standard of review and the guidelines for applying that standard? (British Columbia, Canada)
How have courts treated the "patentently unreasonable standard" of standard of conduct in cases involving mixed fact and law? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the standard of care required by the Court of Arbitration for Review of Standards of Care? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the standard of care required for a professional to be considered in determining whether a professional met the requisite standard for care? (British Columbia, Canada)
In what circumstances will the BCSC review the applicable standard of review apply to a point of law arising in interlocutory proceedings? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the standard of disclosure required by a medical professional? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the common law standard of care for a driver in a motor vehicle accident? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the standard of reasonableness for a claim for special damages? (British Columbia, Canada)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.