Scott Russ
High Secure Inpatient Services - The Park Centre for Mental Health, Richlands, QLD, Australia.
Australas Psychiatry. 2009 Apr;17(2):134-40. doi: 10.1080/10398560802579591.
The aim of this paper is to examine the recent decision of the NSW Supreme Court, which considered a personal injuries action brought by a patient treated in the community following a 6 day voluntary hospital admission.
The judicial reasoning in Walker v Sydney West Area Health Service provides some comfort to mental health professionals practising in other jurisdictions whose legislative provisions are similar to those contained in the Civil Liability Act (NSW). In applying the Bolam principle, rather than the higher common law standard previously imposed by the High Court in Rogers v Whitaker, the decision is encouraging for mental health professionals whose management accords with accepted current good practice. The infrequent scrutiny by courts and coroners of management practice and systems in mental health is a further incentive to maintain continuous improvement of quality of care (by clinical audits, active risk management, professional development and supervision, and patient/family participation) consistent with the principles of clinical governance.
本文旨在审视新南威尔士州最高法院最近的一项判决，该判决涉及一名患者在自愿住院6天后在社区接受治疗而提起的人身伤害诉讼。
沃克诉悉尼西区卫生服务局案中的司法推理为在其他司法管辖区执业且立法规定与《新南威尔士州民事责任法》类似的心理健康专业人员提供了一些慰藉。在适用博勒姆原则而非高等法院先前在罗杰斯诉惠特克案中规定的更高普通法标准时，该判决对管理符合当前公认良好做法的心理健康专业人员具有鼓舞作用。法院和验尸官对心理健康管理实践和系统的审查较少，这进一步促使人们按照临床治理原则（通过临床审计、积极的风险管理、专业发展与监督以及患者/家属参与）持续改进护理质量。
