Introduction
In most situations, obtaining a patient’s valid consent to a procedure or treatment is a simple matter of following straightforward guidelines, but circumstances can occasionally develop in which conflicting principles must be resolved and this can pose a dilemma for clinicians. This booklet has been written as a guide to the ethical and legal principles that should be applied, both in straightforward and more challenging circumstances.
In all circumstances, the overriding duties of a clinician can be summed up as follows:
To treat patients without their consent is a violation of their constitutional rights and transgresses a fundamental principle of medical law
- To respect the bodily integrity and right to self-determination of patients
- Where it is not possible to obtain a patient’s valid consent, to act in the patient’s best interests.
To treat patients without their consent is a violation of their constitutional rights and transgresses a fundamental principle of medical law. The basic rule is simple: no-one has the right to touch anyone else without lawful excuse and if doctors do so it may well undermine patients’ trust. Such behaviour may lead to a clinical negligence claim, a complaint to the Medical Council or even civil or criminal proceedings for assault.
There are three components to valid consent:
- Capacity
- Information
- Voluntariness.