Consent, as we know, is the authorization or grant of permission by the patient for treatment or any diagnostic, surgical or therapeutic procedure to be carried out by the doctor. A doctor has to take consent from the patient before proceeding with his treatment. It is ethical and in today's scenario, a legal requirement. Any act done without permission is "battery" or physical assault and is liable for punishment.
A valid consent has three components: Disclosure, Capacity and Voluntariness i.e. provision of relevant information by the doctor, capacity of the patient to understand the information given and take a decision based on the adequate information without force or coercion. This is informed consent. Any permission given under any unfair or undue pressure makes the consent invalid.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has defined 'adequate information' in the landmark case of Samira Kohli vs Dr Prabha Manchanda. This includes "(a) nature and procedure of the treatment and its purpose, benefits and effect (b) alternatives if any available (c) an outline of the substantial risks and (d) adverse consequences of refusing treatment."
No doctor practices medicine without taking informed consent. Yet we read and hear of incidents of violence against doctors from all parts of the country. So, are we going wrong somewhere? Are we doing something wrong somewhere?
eMediNews
No comments:
Post a Comment