Complete Check-Your Understanding Questions About Mohr and The Questions to Pronder About Mohr on pg. 414.

1. Complete Check-Your Understanding Questions About Mohr and The Questions to Pronder About Mohr on pg. 414.

Check-Your-Understanding Questions About Mohr 

A. Would  Anna  Mohr  have  been  able  to  sue  in  negligence?  Why  or why not?

 B. Would Mohr have had a cause of action if she had been brought to the hospital unconscious and the surgery had been necessary on an emergency basis?

Questions to Ponder About Mohr

A. Do you think plaintiffs such as Anna Mohr should have a cause of action even in circumstances such as these where no harm is actually done?

 B. If there is an interest in making sure that physicians do not exceed the scope of a patient’s consent, could that be better handled through professional rules that are enforced by licensing boards? Or is the tort system a proper tool to use? Why or why not?

1. Complete Questions to Ponder About Largey on pg. 428.

Questions to Ponder About Largey

A. Which  is  better,  the  physician  rule  (a/k/a  the  “‘professional standard’  rule”)  or  the  patient  rule  (a/k/a  the  “‘prudent  patient’ rule”)? Why?

B. Assuming that a jurisdiction opts for the patient rule, do you agree with the Largey court that the causation standard should be objective? Or  should  it  be  subjective?  Stated  differently,  should  the  plaintiff have a cause of action if the hypothetical prudent patient would have made a different decision had the risk been disclosed? (The objective causation  standard.)  Or  should  it  only  matter  whether  the  particular plaintiff  would  have  made  a  different  decision  had  the  risk  been disclosed? (The subjective causation standard.)

1. Complete Questions to Ponder About Corcoran on pg. 449.

Questions to Ponder About Corcoran

A. Do you agree that the language of the ERISA statute requires the preemption  of  medical  malpractice  suits  of  the  kind  broughtin  the Corcoran case?

B. Putting  aside  the  language  of  the  ERISA  statute,  do  you  think such  pre-emption  is  a  good  idea?  What  are  the  arguments  for  and against it as a matter of policy? 

Please use the book attached/ only need a few sentences per question