Documenting the process of patient decision making: a review of the development of the law on consent
Author(s) -
Mohsin I Choudry,
Aishah Latif,
Leslie Hamilton,
Bertie Leigh
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
future hospital journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2055-3331
pISSN - 2055-3323
DOI - 10.7861/futurehosp.3-2-109
Subject(s) - paternalism , autonomy , duty , set (abstract data type) , specialty , judgement , order (exchange) , informed consent , process (computing) , outcome (game theory) , psychology , medicine , law , business , political science , family medicine , alternative medicine , computer science , economics , mathematical economics , finance , pathology , programming language , operating system
The doctor's role involves helping patients to understand their condition, including the anticipated benefits and risks of proposed treatments or omissions to treat. In order to treat, doctors require consent from patients but the duty to advise is equally strong if conservative management is appropriate. The recent judgement in the case of Montgomery has set a precedent for patient autonomy. However, doctors are still required to judge what risks they should disclose in their reasonable assessment of that patient and their specific situation. The General Medical Council reflects a consensus that the empowered autonomous patient is more likely to be satisfied with their clinical outcome than the passive victim of medical paternalism. Doctors, regardless of specialty, must counsel their patients adequately, paying particular attention to identifying material risks that are likely to be significant to their case.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom