In the health care field, the concept of informed consent allows patients to make their own decisions regarding their health care. A patient and physician have a discussion about the details of a medical process. They must discuss risks, alternatives and outcome of treatment. If a patient agrees to the terms of treatment then they are allowing or giving consent to the physician. Patient education and communication are vital during this process. Often doctors will try to act in beneficence but it is critical that they respect a patient’s autonomy. They have a duty to no do harm which can make it difficult if doctors and patients cannot come to an agreement on treatments. If a physician acts without consent then it can result in battery or negligence. …show more content…
It gives a code which doctors must adhere by and that they should try to do what is best for their patients. They first and most important part of the oath would be “do no harm.” This refers to how doctors should always try to follow the best course of action to help their patients without hurting them. Informed consent regulations came around due to human experimentation in WWII. Unfortunately, many humans were used as test subjects to perform unethical experiments by Nazi doctors. They claimed there were no laws about medical research to defend their actions. The Nuremberg code of 1947 was written in response to this. It is one of the most famous documents on human testing and the concept of informed consent. The Nuremberg code has 10 standards to which doctors must conform to when deciding to do human testing. After the Nuremberg code was written, the Declaration of Helsinki was written in 1964 in Poland and it helped define ethics and human …show more content…
“In addition to federal regulations, all 50 states have adopted some form of informed consent law, and many have adopted additional regulations as well, but there is wide variation among state laws regarding both clinical and research settings.” In South Carolina, a court case called Hook v. Rothstein sets the precedence for informed consent. The case is about a man named Jack Summers who went to his doctor complaining of stomach pain. The doctor gave him an antacid to help relieve pain and suggested he watch his diet. His pain did not subside so he had tests done which showed he had a large tumor in his intestines. After consulting many doctors, Summers decided on a procedure to treat his pain. This procedure was a great risk for patients who suffered from allergies and a negative reaction to the process could cause death in those patients. Mr. Summers did not tell his doctor that he was an allergy sufferer. Summers unfortunately did have an adverse reaction which resulted in his death. The lawsuit came about because it was claimed Dr. Rothstein did not inform Mr. Summers of all of the risks of the treatment. It was considered an act of negligence on Rothstein’s part. As a result of the law suit, South Carolina regulations insist a physician must inform the patient specifically of: the diagnosis, nature of treatment, risks, the probability of success, the outcome if no treatment is desired, and any
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
When Hopkins wanted more blood samples from the Lacks, the doctors told Day that the blood sample would be used to see if they would be prone to develop cancer in the future; however, the true intention of the doctors was to see if the Lacks had something that can contribute to further HeLa cell research. Also, informed consent was not present in this case of Henrietta’s autopsy. Although Day did get a consent form, he did not fully understand the agreements written on the paper. If Day had known that Henrietta’s cells would be used in experiments, he would not have agreed. In addition, another important case of informed consent violation is the experiment done by Chester Southam.
Informed consent means to give a patient all the necessary information that is needed to make an informed and voluntary decision or agreeing to a treatment, or research that will benefit them. For doctors to fully obtain informed consent, Henrietta should have been told or given the necessary information about the possible risks and benefits of the research, so that she can have an understanding and make a decision whether or not to participate in the study. The purpose, the procedures, the potential risks and benefits of her being involved in the research should have been given to her, and also the risks and benefits of other options available to her should have been presented to her. She should have also been given time to discuss her decision to consent to the research with her family. If anything, I believe that the consent form was about any mishaps that might have happened during her surgery.
This type of consent today is at most unfair, how is someone supposed to understand an endless amount of material that they know nothing about . Who is going to even read those 40 pages ? Most people will just sign and not go through the hassle of understanding , and the doctors should keep that in mind when asking the patient for permission . There are some that also say that the patient should understand and it’s their problem if they don’t. This point is easily unrealistic , because it is suggesting what basic knowledge of every person should have, which reveals that it’s more opinion than
This can make the patient feel like they are in some sort of control (Privacy and Confidentiality). Making the patient feel like they are in control and respected will help establish the trust between the patient and the researcher. Therefore informed consent in the biomedical research is very important to have and should be
Consent is patients’ rights because they have right to know what is happening to their life which is fundamental value in professional practice (Department of Health (DH), 2001). Dougherty and Lister (2015) state that consent is a patient’s rights to refuse or to accept a treatment. However, Dimond (2010) said that consent is a voluntarily decision which can be given orally, verbally, written or implied for example if you ask a patient to take their blood pressure and they offer their arm. Eyal (2012) also states that consent promote trust in medical procedures that people may seek and comply with medical advice and participate in medical research. Bok (2013) argues that there are problems with the trust-promoting as many patients give consent despite being to some extent distrustful.
For instance, the practitioners are obligated to constantly inform the participants about plans that pertains to interventions (Reamer, 1987). In addition, it is essential for informed consent to include the following: “What is done, the reasons for doing it, clients must be capable of providing consent, they must have the right to refuse or withdraw consent, and their decisions must be based on adequate information” (Kirk & Wakefield, 1997, p. 275). One of the most dehumanizing incidents that occur is the researchers prohibit the participants’ self-determination. For example, the men were compliant with receiving treatment and to be examined by the physicians.
Autonomy: In a healthcare setting, the right of a patient to make informed choices about their body is defined as autonomy. The moral principle of respect for autonomy directs healthcare providers to refrain from preventing patients from making their own decisions unless these choices pose serious risks to the patient or society. This means that an informed and competent patient has the ability to either accept or decline treatments, surgeries and medications. From the information gathered in the assignment case, it can be assumed that Joseph is in a rational state of mind.
They were not educated so when the doctor would say something scientific they would trust every word while not even understanding what he was saying. This part of informed consent was stressed throughout the book because in today’s society most people have enough education to have a general idea what is going on when they are at the hospital about to have a procedure done, making it seem
Medicine has changed in ways over the years that one might have never thought twice about having anything like that happen to them. People today have increased their knowledge overall about their health situations and how to treat themselves. Patients are stepping up and making decisions about their healthcare choices each day with physicians. And in this process it has turned out to be so important for people to understand what is truly being done before medical treatment is given. We have talked this semester about informed consent and how important it is that our patients understand the meaning of what they are having done.
However, the process is certainly not perfect. Many patients do not fully understand what exactly it is they’re signing. Nonetheless, physicians must explain to patients to the best of their abilities. Informed consent is a vital process. Although most people are willing to help with research that will positively contribute to the future of medicine, a majority would be appalled to discover
Informed consent must never be assumed. On the other side of the spectrum, informed refusal is the patient's right to deny any of the services recommended. From a legal standpoint, it is important to always document informed consent and refusal to avoid any legal
Patients have a right to complain about the doctor's refusal to the Management. Provision of Treatment requires patient’s choice and informed consent. Even if a patient has signed a general consent clause, the patient can still refuse medical treatment or procedures. However, in exceptional or emergency situations a doctor may be legally justified in performing surgery or providing treatment without the patient's consent. The patient should be competent and capable of making such a decision to give a consent.