Rights, responsibility, and results

Several important decisions were made in 2000 concerning the proof of malpr actice and the fundamental principles of medical responsibility. in order t o guarantee indemnities for victims of medical accidents, the French courts have facilitated the implication of medical responsibility for medical acc idents. The notion of a "virtual fault" was developed allowing the courts t o retain the responsibility of the surgeon for instance for injury to the s ublingual nerve during extraction of a wisdom tooth or for injury to the po pliteal artery (March 23, 2000). These decisions not only facilitate the demonstration of malpractice but al so modify the definition of responsibility, all physicians being required t o use all available means. Likewise, although jurisprudence asserts that a safe result is mandatory in certain areas, the essential obligation is the absence of "fault" and not the result despite the disquieting arguments put forward by the Paris appeals court in its January 15, 1999 decree. The pat ient's right to a result was sustained only in well defined areas. (C) 2001 , Masson, Paris.