Minimally legally invasive dentistry

One disadvantage of the rapid advances in modern dentistry is that treatment options have never been more varied or confusing. Compounded by a more educated population greatly assisted by online information in an increasingly litigious society, a major concern in recent times is increased litigation against health practitioners. The manner in which courts handle disputes is ambiguous and what is considered fair or just may not be reflected in the judicial process. Although legal decisions in Australia follow a doctrine of precedent, the law is not static and is often reflected by community sentiment. In medical litigation, this has seen the rejection of the Bolam principle with a preference towards greater patient rights. Recent court decisions may change the practice of dentistry and it is important that the clinician is not caught unaware. The aim of this article is to discuss legal issues that are pertinent to the practice of modern dentistry through an analysis of legal cases that have shaped health law. Through these discussions, the importance of continuing professional development, professional association and informed consent will be realized as a means to limit the legal complications of dental practice.