Pros And Cons Of Informed Consent

Katz states this about informed consent, “to suggest that informed consent with remain a fairy tale as long as the idea of joint decisionmaking, based on commitment to paint autonomy and self-determination, does not become an integral aspect of the ethos of medicine and the law of informed consent” (222).

In their article, “The Concept of Informed Consent,” Faden and Beauchamp give two varying definitions of informed consent, namely sense one and sense two. Sense one is defined as autonomous authorization, meaning that the patient or subject agrees and then gives authority to move forward with a proposal (Vaughn 191). The authors give four conditions that have to be met for informed consent to be recognized: the patient has to understand the information presented to her, there should be no manipulation or coercion, and she has to intentionally give her authorization (Vaughn 191). Faden and Beauchamp also note that the fourth condition, where the patient gives her authorization, is pivotal in this sense since it differentiates autonomous authorization

Informed consent is the basis for all legal and moral aspects of a patient’s autonomy. Implied consent is when you and your physician interact in which the consent is assumed, such as in a physical exam by your doctor. Written consent is a more extensive form in which it mostly applies when there is testing or experiments involved over a period of time. The long process is making sure the patient properly understands the risk and benefits that could possible happen during and after the treatment. As a physician, he must respect the patient’s autonomy. For a patient to be an autonomous agent, he must have legitimate moral values. The patient has all the rights to his medical health and conditions that arise. When considering informed

Another issue with the implementation of Informed consent arises when the patient waives the right to Informed consent and leaves the right to make the decision on the physician. Though legally correct, this can cause psychological stress for the physician especially when the decision is about a life threatening medical condition. Moreover, this also makes the patient vulnerable to abuse. (Manthous, DeGirolamo, 2003)

In this paper, I will focus on the ethical issues of informed consent and the cultural mindsets of doctors and scientists during this time period.

Obtaining an informed consent is a vital part of current health care. This document lists out several key pieces of information for both the patient, Provider, and the ancillary staff that also access the document during the procedure process. However, obtaining informed consent has not always been the practice norm and in research, informed consent carries different specifications.

In this case, the night of January 11, 1983, Nancy Cruzan was driving a car and lost control of her car as she traveled down Elm Road in Jasper County, Missouri. The car overturned, and Nancy Cruzan was discovered lying face down in a ditch without detectable respiratory and cardiac function. Paramedics were able to restore her breathing and heartbeat at the accident site and she was transported to a hospital in an unconscious state. Then neurosurgeon diagnosed her and found that she is having sustained probable cerebral contusions compounded by significant anoxia (lack of oxygen). The Missouri trial court found that permanent brain damage generally results after 6 minutes in an anoxic state and Nancy was in this stage for 12 to 14 minutes.

An informed consent is the sovereign act by the patient or a research subject to authorize a healthcare professional to perform a medical procedure. It means that patients must be briefed on all the goals of the procedure, the methods to be used by the physician and all the risks that they might be subjected to while undergoing therapies/treatments. De Bord (2014), defines informed consent as “Informed consent is the process by which the treating health care provider discloses appropriate information to a competent patient so that the patient may make a voluntary choice to accept or refuse treatment” (as cited in Appelbaum, 2007). In this paper, I will argue that Jay Katz’s claim for the lack of genuine informed consent in healthcare field is firm by demonstrating and buttressing his claim. I will also pinpoint how Jay Katz’s argument is consistent with the medical professionals’ code of ethics

In the world of medicine, consent is an ethical and a legal agreement between patient and their health care provider; to participate in but not limited to research trials or to obtain medical or surgical interventions. Consent generally is expressed or implied. Express consent can be an oral declaration or it can be provided by printed document. (informed consent). Nevertheless, consent is not an independent entity. It does not function on its own. It works in conjunction with capacity. Spike 2017, stated informed consent is the single most important concept for understanding decision-making capacity. This is measured by a patient’s ability to understand, retain, process and re-communicate the information provided by the medical professionals.

Informed consent is commonly obtained from patients for medical treatment procedures and protocols. While it may serves as a litigated protection and assurance for healthcare professions to confidently perform their duties as healthcare providers, informed consent also ensures patient’s understanding and acknowledgement of their involvement in multiple medical interventions pertaining to their health. As the patient sign these consent documents, they might be unaware of the existence of uncertainty in medical practice. Medicine is the evident of probability because we are not physiologically created equal. Therefore, medical uncertainty is inevitable and physicians have to face tough choices to make a decision they believe to be in patient’s

Informed consent, by definition, requires the administering health care provider to disclose appropriate information to a competent patient, and allow that patient sufficient time to choose, voluntarily, whether to accept or refuse treatment (Appelbaum, 2007). For children, the law upholds an inability to provide their own informed consent as they lack the decisive ability inherent in consent (Appelbaum, 2007). Thereby, for children, a proxy, as determined by the state laws, chooses the course of treatment on their behalf (Appelbaum, 2007). Furthermore, for children of, an undesignated, reasonable age, a consultation about assent, or willingness for acceptance of treatment or care, should follow a guardian’s decision (Appelbaum, 2007). Responsibility

During the court case, Slater v. Baker and Stapleton (1767), physicians testified that it was customary for them to obtain consent from a patient prior to medical intervention (Mazur, 2013). In the United States, the term “informed consent” was first discussed in 1957 during the U.S. appellate court case, Salgo v. Leland Stanford Jr. University Board of Trustees (1957). At that time, the only standard used in informed consent was the professional standard until 1972 when the reasonable person standard was developed by Judge Spottswood Robinson during the landmark case, Canterbury v. Spence (1972) (Mazur,

Informed consent according to Howard Brody is overlooked and not integrated into the health care system properly. The patients’ needs and desires are not met due to the lack of respect for patient autonomy and the overall experience is therefore negative. The legal standards that are currently in place do not explicitly state what is expected of them, therefore creating confusion. In order to resolve this issue, Brody proposes a standard that includes the best-operationalized features of other models, one known as the conversation model. This model is very similar, yet has flaws such as extensive time requirements and justification of a conversation as receiving informed consent in respect to the law. He describes that informed consent is when a patient is reasonably informed and capable of participating in the medical decision making process. Reasonably informed can be described by using two

Patients come from different social, religious and educational backgrounds; therefore there is no single method towards obtaining consent. However the basic approach towards obtaining an informed consent defined by GMC includes assessing the patient’s condition, followed by consenting based on the patient’s knowledge and previous experiences. Patient should be allowed to weigh up the proposed investigation or treatment and the burden of any clinical and non-clinical issue relevant to them. The patient has the right to accept or to refuse the investigation or treatment (GMC,

All participants gave informed consent and were fully debriefed the strengths are the participants were only watching film clips of an event, not witnessing it in real life which could have been distressing .