Montgomery Jonathan, Montgomery Elsa
UCL Laws, University College London, London, UK.
Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, King's College London, London, UK.
J Med Ethics. 2016 Feb;42(2):89-94. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2015-102862.
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.
仔细研读后会发现,蒙哥马利诉拉纳克郡医疗委员会案是一个令人深感不安的判决。矛盾的是,其支持自主权原则的裁决只有通过无视个体患者的实际选择和特征、偏向一种刻板印象才能说得通。该判决显示出在处理具体临床问题方面缺乏专业知识,且歪曲了专业指南。更根本的是,它没有理解专业知识的本质。这让人质疑法院对临床判断问题进行裁决的能力,并使得对披露义务检验标准的一种有吸引力的表述本质上变得不可预测。