searching Humanities & Social Sciences Collection Change databases

Image of Publication

  • Citation only


about this publication

Rogers v. Whitaker Lands on Malaysian Shores - Is There Now a Patient's Right to Know in Malaysia?

Singapore Journal of Legal Studies
Issue July 2009 (July 2009)

Abstract: In Foo Fio Na v. Dr. Soo Fook Mun [2007] 1 M.L.J. 593 ('Foo Fio Na'), the Federal Court of Malaysia rejected the Bolam test in duty of disclosure of risks cases and endorsed the patient-centred approach in Rogers v. Whitaker (1992) 175 C.L.R. 479 ('Rogers'). This article examines the common law developments in England and Australia as well as recent developments in Malaysia in relation to this duty and argues that the decision in Foo Fio Na falls short of its apparent promise of a patient-centred approach. The author proposes that a more appropriate framework to safeguard patient autonomy in Malaysia is required - one that allows for the convergence of the legal and ethical principles relating to a patient's right to know about material risks and one that recognises this right as an extension of the right to life guaranteed by the Malaysian Federal Constitution.

To cite this article: Thomas, Mathews. Rogers v. Whitaker Lands on Malaysian Shores - Is There Now a Patient's Right to Know in Malaysia? [online]. Singapore Journal of Legal Studies, July 2009: 182-210. Availability: <http://search.informit.com.au/documentSummary;dn=194758483394861;res=IELHSS> ISSN: 0218-2173. [cited 01 Sep 16].

Personal Author: Thomas, Mathews; Source: Singapore Journal of Legal Studies, July 2009: 182-210 Document Type: Journal Article ISSN: 0218-2173 Subject: Medical laws and legislation; Informed consent (Medical law); Patients--Legal status, laws, etc.; Trials, litigation, etc.; Identifier: Rogers v Whitaker (case) Affiliation: (1) Assistant Lecturer, Department of Business Law and Taxation, Monash University, Australia

Database: Humanities & Social Sciences Collection