Author’s reply to Poole, Conway, Bewley, Sundar, and Chalmers and FirkinsBMJ 2014; 348 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g3152 (Published 14 May 2014) Cite this as: BMJ 2014;348:g3152
- Michael D Rawlins, president1
- 1Royal Society of Medicine, London WC1G 0AE, UK
The current law is clearly confusing even to lawyers. Poole QC and Conway, as well as Bewley, claim that the bill is unnecessary, and that the existing state of affairs allows for “responsible innovation” along the lines of the Saatchi bill.1 2 3 4 Lord Woolf—a former master of the rolls and a former lord chief justice—disagrees. In …
Log in using your username and password
Log in through your institution
Register for a free trial to thebmj.com to receive unlimited access to all content on thebmj.com for 14 days.
Sign up for a free trial