1 Informed Consent Presented By Associate Professor Catherine Tay National University of Singapore...
-
Upload
kennedy-francis -
Category
Documents
-
view
219 -
download
6
Transcript of 1 Informed Consent Presented By Associate Professor Catherine Tay National University of Singapore...
1
Informed Consent Presented By
Associate Professor Catherine TayNational University of Singapore (NUS)Faculty of Business Administration
Bachelor of Laws (Hons), LondonMaster of Laws, LondonBarrister-at-Law (England)Advocate & Solicitor, Singapore
Author of ‘Medical Negligence’ Book
2
Informed Consent
Things can go wrong in surgical procedure and bad outcome and adverse results may result due to human error, negligent or not.
3
Informed Consent
You did not inform me of the risk which became a reality. I would not have consented to the operation if I had known of the risks, so you have
- caused my injury and
- failed in your medical duty of care to inform
4
Inforrmed Consent
Is there sufficient information to patient’s consent?
5
Inforrmed Consent
Consent is an ethical principle
Medical treatment can only be performed with consent of competent pt
6
Informed Consent
Giving treatment without consent is failure to respect patient’s autonomy violating an individual’s right of self-determination
7
Informed Consent
Consent must be freely given with patient understanding
- the nature
- risks
- benefits
- alternatives
- limitations
of proposed treatment.
8
Informed Consent
Any medical treatment given without consent is an action for trespass where damages are payable
9
Inforrmed Consent
The consent form is for patient to acknowledge that the nature & purpose of treatment has been
- fully explained - understood and - consented to.
10
Informed Consent
Pt never consented to doctor’s negligence but only to risks & complications involved
11
Inforrmed Consent
In an emergency, where pt is unable to consent eg unconsciousness, a doctor is justified to carry out emergency treatment based on
- doctrine of necessity or - implied consent
12
Informed Consent
Implied Consent
It is presumed that pt would have consented to treatment as it was necessary to save his life or from serious harm
13
Doctor’s Legal Duty to Disclose information What is the level or standard
of disclosure to be expected in medical law?
A pt can only give real consent to treatment if he has sufficient information to make a decision for an informed consent
14
Checklist - Informed Consent name of operation nature of proposed treatment what the operation involves other treatment options or
alternatives potential complications risks of operation risk of no treatment
15
Checklist
special precautions required post-operatively
benefits of treatment limitations of treatment success rate of operation what happens on admission how pt will feel after treatment
16
Informed Consent
Information include warning
Warn of any real risk that treatment may be ineffective
Alternative treatments should be told esp. if got choice between surgical & medical procedures
17
Informed Consent
The fact that pt asked questions showing concern about the risk would make doctor aware that pt does attach significance to the risk
A lot depends on pt’s way of questioning
18
Rogers v Whittaker (1992) A 1:14,000 of blindness turned
into a risk which it was found to be negligent not to disclose
A risk, even if it is a mere possibility, should be regarded as ‘material’ if its occurrence causes serious consequences
19
Informed Consent
Once pt ask “How serious?” the operation is, doctor should discuss
- the relative conveniences
- expertise
- possible risks.
20
Informed Consent
To say less is misleading & inadequate
Good communication is stressed and is highly desirable between doctor-pt relationship
21
Medical Negligence
Failure by doctor to disclose risks of treatment can result in action for negligence
The test which medical negligence is assessed is Bolam test , now modified by Bolitho case
22
Bolitho case
Failure of hospital doctor to examine & intubate child experiencing respiratory distress, leading to brain damage through asphyxia
23
Bolitho case (1997)
Pt had expert evidence that a reasonably competent doctor would have intubated in those circumstance
- Doctor had own expert witnesses saying that non-intubation was clinically justifiable response
24
Bolam Test
A doctor is not negligent if what he has done is accepted current practice by a responsible body of medical opinion
25
Bolitho case
House of Lords case
The court must be satisfied that the body of opinion is logical
Clearly this rejection of Bolam test
26
Bolitho case
It is now a matter for court & not medical opinion to decide standard of professional care
Bolitho case represented a significant nail on Bolam’s coffin
27
Kamalam v Eastern Planttaion Agency(1996) Malaysian case – where Bolam
test not folllowed
A Malaysian judge can now decide on his own disregarding expert medical evidence on the sufficiency of consent – informed consent
28
Informed Consent
Medical opinions are still required to assist the court in its deliberation
Bolam test has been challenged & rejected in America, Canada, Australia, South Africa & Malaysia
29
Singapore cases
Dennis Matthew Harte v Dr Tan Hun Hoe & Gleneagles Hospital Ltd [1999]
Gumapathy Muniandy v Dr James Khoo & 2 others – July 2001
Pai Lily v Yeo Peng Hock Henry [2000]
30
Informed Consent
Highly desirable for doctor to record in his medical notes that
- risks and alternatives were disclosed & - understood by pts,
apart from pt signing consent form
31
Medical Ethics
It is no harm to disclose all ‘material risks’ & information to pts as they have a right to do what they want with their own bodies
32
Medical Ethics
Pts could choose to do nothing after being informed of options/alternatives& consequences of no treatment
This is respecting pt’s autonomy or self-determination in biomedical ethics
33
Medical Ethics
Doctors must abide by the high professional standards
Hippocratic Oath is a moral code concerning beneficence & non-maleficence ie. the pillars of medical ethics – do good, do no harm
34
Medical Ethics
Declaration of Geneva
Singapore Physician Pledge
35
Principles of Biomedical Ethics1. Autonomy
- decision-making
- respect for individuals
- patient’s rights
2. Beneficence
Do Good
36
Medical Ethics
3. Non-Maleficence
Do No Harm
4. Justice
equitable distribution of
benefits & burdens
37
Medical Ethics
5. Fidelity
- truth-telling
- confidentiality
6. Veracity
- honesty
38
Medical Ethics
Medical ethics must lead medical law
A good medical law is an ethical law
Doctor must practice sound medical ethics
39
Complaints & Complaints
Doctors who fail to establish relationship with patients will endanger trust & confidence
Doctor who takes time to explain what and why he propose to do & how much it cost are less likely to be subject of complaints
40
Proving Medical Negligence 1. Duty of Care
2. Standard of Medical Care
3. Causation
4. Remoteness (ie suffer damage)
41
NEGLIGENCE Is failure to exercise
reasonable care and skill, or
Omission to do something which a reasonable man would do, or
Something which a reasonable man would not do
42
Negligence
Careful doctor but still negligent
Things can go wrong –
1. Diagnosis
2. Treatment
3. Information Disclosure
43
Standard of Medical Care Careful doctor but still
Negligent
Keeping abreast with latest developments and technology & incorporate them in his practice
Not expected to read every article in medical journals
44
Doctor judged by standard or awareness and sophistication to be expected of a doctor in his sort of profession
All doctors not expected to have level of awareness available to a professor
To be judged on what is to be expected of doctor/dentist in regular practice
45
If GP fail to refer patient to consultant when reasonable GP would, GP is negligent
No allowance made for inexperience and age
60 year old GP in private practice, must meet same standard of alertness as 30 year GP
46
Medical Negligence is a Civil Wrong TORT
Tort = Wrongful Act
47
Wrongful Act
Criminal liability
Civil liability
Contractual liable
Tortiously liable
48
MEDIATION
LITIGATION
ARBITRATION
49
52
Medical errorsAs to errors of clinical judgement the House of Lords in an important
medical negligence case of Whitehouse V Jordan (1981) had this to
say:
“… Merely to describe something as an error of judgement tells
nothing about whether it is negligent or not. The true position is
that an error of judgement may, or may not, be negligent; it
depends on the nature of the error. If it is one that would not have
been made by a reasonably competent professional man
professing to have the standard and type of skill that the
defendant held himself out as having, and acting with ordinary
care, then it is negligent. If, on the other hand, it is an error that
such a man, acting with ordinary care, might have made, then it is
not negligent.”
53
Penal Code
section 93 - recognises that patient got right to know, even if communication may cause death by shock
54
END OF SEMINAR
THANK YOU
Associate Professor Catherine Tay National University of Singapore
Dept of Business Policy
Email: fbatayc @ leonis . nus . edu . sg
Website : www . catherinetay . com . sg
Tel : 4695704 or 96951656