Montgomery on informed consent: an inexpert decision?

Montgomery v Lanarkshire HB is a deeply troubling decision when read closely. Paradoxically, its ruling supporting the principle of autonomy could be justified only by disregarding the individual patient's actual choices and characteristics in favour of a stereotype. The decision demonstrates a...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Authors: Montgomery, Jonathan (Author) ; Montgomery, Elsa (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: BMJ Publ. 2016
In: Journal of medical ethics
Year: 2016, Volume: 42, Issue: 2, Pages: 89-94
Online Access: Presumably Free Access
Volltext (JSTOR)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Description
Summary:Montgomery v Lanarkshire HB is a deeply troubling decision when read closely. Paradoxically, its ruling supporting the principle of autonomy could be justified only by disregarding the individual patient's actual choices and characteristics in favour of a stereotype. The decision demonstrates a lack of expertise in dealing with specific clinical issues and misrepresents professional guidance. More fundamentally, it fails to appreciate the nature of professional expertise. This calls into question the competence of the courts to adjudicate on matters of clinical judgement and makes an attractive formulation of the test for disclosure obligations inherently unpredictable.
ISSN:1473-4257
Contains:Enthalten in: Journal of medical ethics
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2015-102862