03.08.2013 Views

Public Health Law Map - Beta 5 - Medical and Public Health Law Site

Public Health Law Map - Beta 5 - Medical and Public Health Law Site

Public Health Law Map - Beta 5 - Medical and Public Health Law Site

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

S<strong>and</strong>ers J. The revolution in medical care delivery. ND <strong>Law</strong> Rev. 1997;73:19.<br />

Smith MF. Telemedicine <strong>and</strong> safety. J Telemed Telecare. 1996;2:33–36.<br />

Telemedicine presents new malpractice concerns according to physician insurers<br />

association. J Okla State Med Assoc. 1997;90:101–102.<br />

Ziel SE. Telecommunications in medical care. AORN J. 1998; 67:458–459.<br />

X. Consent to <strong>Medical</strong> Treatment<br />

HIGHLIGHTS<br />

Introduction<br />

Informed consent is the core principle of modern medical practice.<br />

In some very limited circumstances, care can be provided without consent.<br />

<strong>Medical</strong> care practitioners must disclose conflicts of interest that might affect<br />

their clinical judgment.<br />

There are special laws governing consent for minors <strong>and</strong> incompetents.<br />

Patients have the right to refuse medical care, even when it means they will die.<br />

Patients do not have a right to improper care or assisted suicide.<br />

The doctrine of informed consent is the cornerstone of modern medical jurisprudence.<br />

Although the need for bare consent to treatment is old, informed consent arose after<br />

World War II, driven by the Nuremberg Doctrine <strong>and</strong> the rise of technological medicine.<br />

It has been one of the most misunderstood principles in medical law, sometimes driving<br />

a wedge between patients <strong>and</strong> physicians. Now it is returning to its roots in the<br />

physician’s fiduciary duty to the patient, as consent issues shift from concerns about<br />

unnecessary or inappropriate treatments to denial of treatment driven by managed care<br />

organizations’ cost cutting.<br />

This section reviews the history of informed consent <strong>and</strong> discusses the different<br />

st<strong>and</strong>ards governing simple <strong>and</strong> informed consent. These st<strong>and</strong>ards reflect the conflict<br />

between legal ideals of medical care <strong>and</strong> its reality. Patient advocates <strong>and</strong> many<br />

physicians view informed consent as a way to empower patients, thereby making them<br />

equal partners in the therapeutic relationship. This is a naive view of informed consent.<br />

Informed consent does not affect the disparity in power <strong>and</strong> knowledge between<br />

physicians <strong>and</strong> patients. Informed consent is very important at the margin, when there<br />

are clear, simple-to-underst<strong>and</strong> choices. It cannot protect patients from overreaching by<br />

physicians or from antiscientific delusions about medical treatments. Good science <strong>and</strong><br />

proper st<strong>and</strong>ards for medical practice are more empowering than elaborate informed<br />

consent rituals. Informed consent is a laudable goal, but it is possible to comply with the<br />

legal st<strong>and</strong>ards for informed consent without effectively involving the patient in the<br />

decision-making process. When this happens, physicians lose the true value of informed<br />

273

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!