What is considered a "delicate balance of factors" in medical malpractice cases?

Wilson v. Swanson, supra, a “delicate balance of factors” was considered in that the surgeon was faced with a decision to postpone a larger excision with the risk of fatal consequences or to proceed on his and another experts’ best judgment to proceed with the removal of portions of organs which were not of vital significance. Rand J. states at p. 812: An error in judgment has long been distinguished from an act of unskilfulness or carelessness or due to lack of knowledge. Although universally-accepted procedures must be observed, they furnish little or no assistance in resolving such a predicament as faced the surgeon here. In such a situation a decision must be made without delay based on limited known and unknown factors; and the honest and intelligent exercise of judgment has long been recognized as satisfying the professional obligation.