Helling V. Carey (1974)
Definition
Washington Supreme Court case in which ophthalmologist Thomas Carey was held negligent for not performing tonometry on a patient under 40, despite following professional consensus, because the precaution was so inexpensive and the potential harm so severe. The decision was legislatively reversed in Washington by the Medical Malpractice Reform Act 1975 but retains theoretical significance.
- Court
- Washington Supreme Court
- Defendant
- Ophthalmologist Thomas Carey
- Issue
- Failure to perform tonometry on patient under 40
- Basis
- Low test cost versus severity of potential harm
- Later status
- Legislatively reversed, Washington, 1975
Common questions
Why is Helling v. Carey still discussed if the legislature overturned its rule?+
The case is taught as the clearest example of a court departing from the professional-custom standard and applying a cost-benefit reasonableness test instead, so it remains a reference point in negligence theory even though its holding no longer governs Washington claims.
What made the court reject the "everyone in the profession does it this way" defense in this case?+
The court reasoned that following customary practice does not automatically satisfy the duty of care when a simple, inexpensive test could have prevented a serious and irreversible harm, treating professional custom as evidence rather than a conclusive defense.
Related terms
- BNS § 106
- Section 106 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, reproducing the substance of IPC § 304A (causing death by negligence). Sub-section (1) applies...
- Bolam Test
- The UK standard for medical negligence from Bolam v. Friern Hospital Management Committee (1957) 1 WLR 582: a doctor is not negligent...
- Bolitho Qualification
- The qualification to Bolam from Bolitho v. City and Hackney HA (1997) 4 All ER 771: the responsible body of medical opinion...
- Jacob Mathew Test
- The framework from Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab (2005) 6 SCC 1 for criminal medical negligence under IPC § 304A (now...
- Martin D'Souza Safeguard
- The procedural protection from Martin D'Souza v. Mohd. Ishfaq (2009) 3 SCC 1 requiring that before registering a criminal case against a...
- Montgomery V. Lanarkshire (2015)
- UK Supreme Court case replacing the Bolam test on risk disclosure with a patient-centred test: a doctor must take reasonable care to...
- NMC (India)
- The National Medical Commission, established under the NMC Act 2019, replacing the Medical Council of India. Comprises four boards (UGMEB, PGMEB, ARB,...