Informed consent is relatively new in the world of modern medicine and is still a highly debatable topic. Patient autonomy, or informed consent, is the right of a patient to be informed by their physician(s) or health care provider about their current well-being and having a say in their options for treatment. Until informed consent was required, it was the physician or health care provider’s decisions that are trusted by the patient and their family to benefit the patient. One thing that I found to be interesting was that in the past, information about a patient’s current medical condition and treatment could be withheld in order to keep them with a positive attitude and hopeful. This was interesting because it is contradictory to was informed …show more content…
To this day, your doctor aids the patient in understanding their medical condition and treatment, but ultimately, the patient is the one making the decision. For this highly debated topic, I will be agreeing with yes side because I believe that patient autonomy/informed consent is very important when it comes to making rational decisions about your health. I believe that Dan Brock and Steven Warman’s argument not only supports my decision, they also had very strong arguments to why patient autonomy is crucial in the medical field. On the contrary, Gordon Stirrat and Robin Gill say that whether the physician or patient makes a decision, all decisions should be respected based on a mutual level of trust between all …show more content…
As previously mentioned, patients had essentially no role in their medical decisions until about a couple decades ago. People believed that this was okay because they trusted their doctor to make the right choice of treatment. Patient autonomy and shared-decision making has recently become prevalent in the medical field which allows the patients and doctors to collaborate about the best option possible. This is a very good thing because it allows the patient and the physician to make a unified decision that is acceptable to both party’s values and beliefs. This type of decision making is only made possible because it allows the physician to contribute their wide range of experience and knowledge and the patient to contribute their aims/goals and values. For example; while I was growing up, I always hear the name Dr. Veslik. That name never meant anything to me until my mom told me that he has been treating my family since she was a little girl and was there in the room when I was born. While collaborating, the physician verbally weighs the risks and benefits of each option which allows the patient to come to a conclusion for their best treatment option. Stirrat and Gill have a different belief when it comes to
In the book “The Immortal life of Henrietta Lacks,” Rebecca Skloot identifies a part of the book that talks about a patient’s consent to certain treatments at the Hospital. She specifically talks about how Henrietta was given an informed consent form, which she signed before she was given treatment; However, health consent forms could be argued back and forth in relation to how they worked back then, because with or without them Doctors still experimented on patients without their consents compared to these enlightened days where patients are in complete control of knowing what the doctor does with their bodies. Like Deborah said and if you want to go into history don’t go into it with a premeditated judgment like hate, one just has to understand that it wasn’t the fault of the people but the naivety of those times. A true case of patients where patients were left in the dark about a treatment was the Tuskegee Syphilis experiment where patients were just given a vague explanation to what they were
In modern society, most depend on the opinion of a trained healthcare professional to ensure a solution to an issue. But what does one do when the patient has no understanding of the potential harm and side effects caused? Henrietta Lacks, a black woman of low social status, faced the trials of cervical cancer without providing informed consent, or the “legal rules that prescribe behaviors for physicians and other healthcare professionals.” If Lacks had not been a crusader in informed consent, then the legacy of patient awareness would not exist today. Lacks’ story takes place in Baltimore, Maryland when she checks into Johns Hopkins Hospital, to address a pain in her lower abdomen.
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
Similarly, all clinicians need to gain consent from nearly every patient, either verbal or non-verbal, unless in an immediately life-threatening condition. To refuse consent, a patient has to have all information presented to them by the clinician including; the risks they may face, other alternatives to the initial treatment plan and likelihood of success (SCAS, 2016, 5.3). Consent given by a patient under unfair pressure from a friend/family member or clinician, is not considered consent as it is not the patient’s decision. If a valid consent has been given, then a patient is entitled to withdraw their consent at any time. If a patient lacks capacity to give consent, and has no nominated person with Lasting Powers of Attorney, then no one can give consent on their behalf (SCAS, 2016,
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
The most important lesson for healthcare practitioners is that informed consent is an essential component
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.
By telling patients too much information, informed consent can hurt patients more than protect them because of the mental block of fear and patient
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
Methodology The author utilized excessive methodology throughout his book during the Tuskegee Experiment Study. Throughout the study, the helping professionals had many challenges and made changes when conducting this experiment. During this time, the helping professionals had no legal guidelines or stipulations until the last few years of the study. In the book, there were several methodologies that were utilized during the experiment.
Atul Gawande in his article “Whose body is it, anyway?” introduced couple of cases, which discussed a controversial topic, doctors dealing with patients and making important medical decisions. These are difficult decisions in which people might have life or death choices. Who should make the important decisions, patients or doctors? Patients don’t usually know what is better for their health and while making their decisions, they might ignore or don’t know the possible side effects and consequences of these decisions.
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.
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.
(Julia J. 2013) Emotion and willingness to treat have significant influence on the therapeutic relationship between practitioner and patient. Patient is our teacher. Patch Adams understands himself better after helping Rudy. There is always something to learn from each patient. Some patients with chronic disease know more about it than any practitioner because they live with the disease for decades.
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.