The Defensive Optometrist

The Case For And Against - The practitioner undertakes a duty of care, operating within a legal framework designed to afford investigative freedom to differential diagnosis within an ever-increasing litigious mise en scene. The characteristics which define this duty and breach of, strongly include the developing concept of consent but reach beyond civil responsibility and into the criminal sphere (with the advent of the first gross negligence manslaughter verdict in the UK). A practitioner’s judgement in this field is almost always incomplete until a series of tests have been completed. With this in mind, the role can provide a challenge in reaching a conclusion without negligently abusing the patient or the duty thereby. The case for and against the rise of defensive optometry will be examined from a lawyer's perspective.