Hassan Majid
Capsticks Solicitors, London, UK.
Dig Dis. 2008;26(1):23-7. doi: 10.1159/000109381. Epub 2008 Feb 15.
'Informed consent' is a widely used term, but its application in a legal perspective can be varied. American and Commonwealth jurisdictions have developed a 'patient-based' true informed consent approach, whereas in the English legal system a 'doctor-based' approach has traditionally been applied in relation to disclosure of risk. This article will seek to compare these approaches and give a brief overview of some of the key legal rulings which have shaped the requirement of consent. The decision in the English case of Chester vs. Afshar is considered as showing the significance the court attached to the principle of autonomy and using ethical and policy considerations to depart from established principles of English law relating to consent to treatment and disclosure of risk. This review is intended as general information and not as legal advice which should be sought from defence organisation and specialist health care lawyers.
“知情同意”是一个广泛使用的术语，但其在法律层面的应用可能多种多样。美国和英联邦司法管辖区形成了一种“基于患者”的真正知情同意方法，而在英国法律体系中，传统上在风险披露方面采用的是“基于医生”的方法。本文将试图比较这些方法，并简要概述一些塑造了同意要求的关键法律裁决。英国切斯特诉阿夫沙尔案的判决被认为表明了法院对自主原则的重视，并利用伦理和政策考量背离了英国法律中关于治疗同意和风险披露的既定原则。本综述仅作为一般信息，并非法律建议，如需法律建议，应向辩护机构和专业医疗保健律师咨询。
