Medical informed consent: General considerations for physicians

被引:132
作者
Paterick, Timothy J. [1 ]
Carson, Geoff V. [3 ]
Allen, Marjorie C. [2 ]
Paterick, Timothy E. [1 ]
机构
[1] Mayo Clin, Div Cardiovasc Dis, Jacksonville, FL 32224 USA
[2] Mayo Clin, Legal Dept, Jacksonville, FL 32224 USA
[3] Univ Georgia, Athens, GA 30602 USA
关键词
D O I
10.4065/83.3.313
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Medical informed consent is essential to the physician's ability to diagnose and treat patients as well as the patient's right to accept or reject clinical evaluation, treatment, or both. Medical informed consent should be an exchange of ideas that buttresses the patient-physician relationship. The consent process should be the foundation of the fiduciary relationship between a patient and a physician. Physicians must recognize that informed medical choice is an educational process and has the potential to affect the patient-physician alliance to their mutual benefit. Physicians must give patients equality in the covenant by educating them to make informed choices. When physicians and patients take medical informed consent seriously, the patient-physician relationship becomes a true partnership with shared decision-making authority and responsibility for outcomes. Physicians need to understand informed medical consent from an ethical foundation, as codified by statutory law in many states, and from a generalized common-law perspective requiring medical practice consistent with the standard of care. It is fundamental to the patient-physician relationship that each partner understands and accepts the degree of autonomy the patient desires in the decision-making process.
引用
收藏
页码:313 / 319
页数:7
相关论文
共 14 条
[1]   Obtaining informed consent from patients in the early phase of acute myocardial infarction:: physicians' experiences and attitudes [J].
Ågård, A ;
Herlitz, J ;
Hermerén, G .
HEART, 2004, 90 (02) :208-210
[2]   CONTROL OF TUBERCULOSIS - THE LAW AND THE PUBLICS HEALTH [J].
ANNAS, GJ .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1993, 328 (08) :585-588
[3]  
CARNERIE F, 1987, American Journal of Law and Medicine, V12, P55
[4]  
Hanson LR, 2001, N D LAW REV, V77, P71
[5]  
KAHNEMAN D, 1982, JUDGMENT UNCERTAINTY, P3350
[6]  
Keeton Werdner, 1984, Prosser and Keeton on the Law of Torts, V5th
[7]  
Maldonado Jose E, 1976, Akron Law Rev, V9, P609
[8]  
MEISEL A, 1979, WISC LAW REV, P413
[9]   INFORMED CONSENT DOES NOT MEAN RATIONAL CONSENT - COGNITIVE LIMITATIONS ON DECISION-MAKING [J].
MERZ, JF ;
FISCHHOFF, B .
JOURNAL OF LEGAL MEDICINE, 1990, 11 (03) :321-350
[10]   PROBING THE QUESTION OF TECHNOLOGY-INDUCED RISK [J].
MORGAN, MG .
IEEE SPECTRUM, 1981, 18 (11) :58-64