LAW SPORTS MEDICINE

field. When determining whether a particular specialist practitioner has breached that standard, the court must determine whether the practitioner has acted in accordance with a recognised body of medical opinion. It is not enough to establish that others would have acted as the practitioner did; the practitioner must be able to demonstrate that their choice of procedure was logically sustainable. From a practical perspective, this means that if a procedure that is other than the norm is being considered, then there must be a reason for choosing the non-standard approach. The main issue that arises at the first contact stage

concerns the number and variety of medical practitioners, and other people fulfilling quasi-medical roles, who may be present at the scene and to provide advice and treatment to the injured sportsperson. The question that the court will ask, if the player claims that the medical practitioner caused or exacerbated their injury, is whether the medic was qualified to carry out the examination or administer the treatment that caused the harm. If the medic is not appropriately qualified, then it is extremely difficult for them to prove that they have acted reasonably in performing the treatment on the injured player. If they are appropriately qualified, and they have followed standard practice for their profession regarding the procedures performed, then no liability will attach to the medical practitioner’s conduct. If the person is administering genuine first aid, then the law expects the first-aider only to avoid making the patient’s condition worse.

REHABILITATION PROGRAMMES Exactly the same legal issues arise in the context of the design and implementation of rehabilitation programmes: as long as the conduct of the medical practitioner is in accordance with a recognised body of opinion in their particular specialism, then no liability will attach to their conduct. The practical difficulty that can arise here concerns the potential conflicts of interest faced by the sports medic. The club may apply pressure to the

www.sportEX.net 15

ADVICE THAT THEY ARE GIVING IS ACCURATE AND TRUTHFUL

medical practitioner to give the player a clean bill of health so that the player can return to action as quickly as possible. Similarly, the player may wish to return to action sooner than they ought to in order to retain their place in the starting line-up or so that they can compete in a prestigious or lucrative event. An added complicating factor is that, in many professional team sports, the players are contractually obliged to either use the club’s medical teams or to disclose the reports of their own medical team should this be different.

The sports medic should, of course, always ensure that

the advice that they are giving is accurate and truthful, whether this relates to the design of a return-to-fitness programme or a diagnosis of an athlete’s fitness. Any rehabilitation programme should be appropriate to the specific injury, sport and athlete, and its design should be within the experience and expertise of the sports medic overseeing its implementation. When the time comes for a determination

of a player’s fitness to play, if the player is still not fit to play, then they should be told that. If the sportsperson chooses to ignore that advice, then the risk is on them, not the medic. Any diagnosis should be disclosed to the sportsperson rather than the club, although

THE SPORTS MEDIC SHOULD ALWAYS ENSURE THAT THE