Informed Consent in Elective Treatment

This paper will examine the issue of informed consent in situations involving elective, non-emergency medical treatment. The paper will briefly discuss the history of informed consent, the types of situations requiring informed consent, the persons involved, the information required for informed consent, and defenses against legal action alleging a lack of informed consent. Throughout the paper, the terms "physician" or "doctor" will refer to all healthcare-givers, unless noted otherwise.

Traditionally, a person who touched another without express consent was liable for the tort of battery; applied to the medical profession, this meant that a physician could be sued by a patient for battery if the physician treated the patient without his or her consent. One of the most often quoted sayings on the subject is that "[e]very human being of adult years and sound mind has a right to determine what shall be done with his own body...." Thus a person could prove a claim of medical battery if he could show that he had been subjected to a medical examination or treatment for which there was no express or implied consent, if the treatment was substantially different than that which was agreed to, and there is proof that the physician intentionally departed from the agreed to form of care. While some states have retained the right to a cause of action based upon battery, most have replaced it with the cause of action under a negli

. . .
t must be informed of possible injuries which could result from chiropractic procedures. A physician should also disclose the availability of reasonable alternative procedures. What is "reasonable" depends upon the circumstances of the patient's case, the personal judgement of the physician, and the personal considerations of the patient. Note that at least one court has ruled that a physician must disclose the existence of an alternative which is more hazardous than that which is recommended. A Physician should also disclose the results of diagnostic tests which are significant to a patient's consent to treatment. Thus, the results of a routine blood test need not be disclosed unless the patient asks or if the test revealed a serious health problem. A physician may have the responsibility of disclosing remote risks, such as AIDS or hepatitis, particular to certain fairly routine procedures, such as intravenous pyelograms (IVP) or blood transfusions. More difficult to determine is what information need not be disclosed. Two standards have arisen regarding disclosure under informed consent principles. The traditional, and most widely used, standard is the medical community or reasonable physician standard. Under this standard, d
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Hawaii Texas, Non-Emergency Treatment, informed consent, physician disclose, medical community, Page Keeton, disclosure information, Law Torts, Practical Guide, information disclosed, consent treatment, Law Institute, Brown Co, Publishing Co, types information disclosed, giving consent, cause action, minors consent, diagnostic tests, Medical Malpractice, Informed Consent, disclose information reasonable, physician disclose information, person patient's position, mental capacity consent,
Approximate Word count = 1912
Approximate Pages = 8 (250 words per page)

More Essays on Informed Consent in Elective Treatment