Chapter 1: Consent - General
This is part of the online companion site to the book Medical Treatment: Decisions and the Law -
The Mental Capacity Act in Action, edited by Christopher Johnston, written by members of 3 Serjeants'
Inn and published by Bloomsbury Professional in 2010.
The site provides (1) updating material as it becomes available and (2) hyperlinks to website addresses
given in the hard copy. The material is organised according to the book's chapter headings. Click on the
chapter headings on the left-hand side to access the material for other chapters.
Updating material
Updating material will be added here as developments occur.
Hyperlinks
Paragraph 1.5 - Footnote 2:
GMC: Consent: patients and doctors making decisions together (http://www.gmc-uk.org/guidance/ethical_guidance/consent_guidance_index.asp), para 9 (2 June 2008).
Paragraph 1.6 - Footnote 1:
Re J (a minor) (child in care: medical treatment) [1993] Fam 15. See also GMC: Consent: patients and doctors making decisions together (http://www.gmc-uk.org/guidance/ethical_guidance/consent_guidance_index.asp), para 5(d). But note
PARA 1.7 below.
Paragraph 1.16 - Footnote 2:
For example, Department of Health’s Reference Guide to Consent for Examination or Treatment (6 April 2001): (http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_103643). For further
key documents on consent from the Department of Health, see http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publichealth/Scientificdevelopmentgeneticsandbioethics/Consent/Consentgeneralinformation/index.htm. See also GMC: Consent: patients and doctors making decisions together (http://www.gmc-uk.org/guidance/ethical_guidance/consent_guidance_index.asp), paras 44–50.
Paragraph 1.23 - Footnote 1:
GMC: Consent: patients and doctors making decisions together (http://www.gmc-uk.org/guidance/ethical_guidance/consent_guidance_index.asp, paras 7–12 (2 June 2008).
Paragraph 1.26 - Footnote 3:
GMC: Consent: patients and doctors making decisions together (http://www.gmc-uk.org/guidance/ethical_guidance/consent_guidance_index.asp), para 12.
Paragraph 1.28 - Footnote 3:
GMC: Consent: patients and doctors making decisions together
(http://www.gmc-uk.org/guidance/ethical_guidance/consent_guidance_index.asp), paras 9(c), 29 and at 42: ‘You should do
your best to make sure that such patients have considered the available options and reached their own decision.’
Paragraph 1.29 - Footnote 1:
The Bristol Royal Infirmary Inquiry (http://www.bristol-inquiry.org.uk/). In Ashcroft, Dawson, Draper and McMillan, Principles of Health Care Ethics (2nd edn, Wiley, 2007), p 320, the authors stated: ‘There was a failure of informed consent in [the Bristol Royal Infirmary] cases, not because the procedures turned out badly, but because it is obviously relevant to patients to know about the manifest inadequacies of those surgeons. In placing themselves or their loved ones in the hands of these surgeons they were unwittingly making themselves or their loved ones vulnerable to the lethal consequences of surgical incompetence.’ Interestingly, they argue further that in the context of a proper ‘informed consent’ doctrine, information about a surgeon’s relative performance is vital: ‘What creates an ethical obligation to disclose a risk is not the magnitude or probability of the risk itself, but whether that particular risk is material to the patient and whether the doctor could reasonably be aware that this risk was material to this patient.’
Appendix 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5:
For further information on the law on consent, see the Department of Health’s Reference guide to consent for examination or treatment (http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_103643).
Appendix 1.6 - Footnote 1:
Mental Capacity Act 2005 Code of Practice - www.publicguardian.gov.uk/mca/code-of-practice.htm