Talk:Duty of care in English law

A lot of this article is VERY poorly written. It is difficult ot understand. surely the point of an encyclopedia is to make complicated concepts (such as the law) accessible to all?

Can anyone re-write? I would, but I know nothing about the subject

It's on my to-do list unless someone else gets there first. I propose a merge with Standard of care in English law since the standard, although a separate concept in principle, basically defines the duty, and it seems that doing them separately is just repeating oneself. J G M Arnold (talk) 14:45, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here's something that makes it all very simple:

The law is not clear on what the responsibilities are for professionals. If they state a doctor must do everything possible for a patient that means they would have to donate an organ to save their lives. I read this somewhere today while doing a google search.

So basically, if one feels that Duty of Care has been violated they should seek an attorney to recover damages. Then the attorneys will have to go through this language and figure it out.

It's pretty suppressive that our law is complicated. I think we should pass a law which makes it much simpler for the person with at least a high school diploma can understand it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.9.80.196 (talk) 22:09, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite

I don't know if anyone will read this in time, but I'm working on a rewrite, and would welcome some help on it. I plan to rewrite some of the other negligence articles too, after it, so leave me a message if you could help with any of that. Cheers, RichsLaw (talk) 14:14, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]