Premature consent and patient duties

Area of Science:

• Medical Ethics
• Patient Autonomy
• Professional Integrity

Background:

• Premature consent describes patient decisions made before consulting healthcare professionals (HCPs).
• These decisions are often based on unreliable information and maintained despite HCP guidance.
• Existing views deem such patients incompetent or misinformed, a stance this paper challenges.

Purpose of the Study:

• To analyze the ethical implications of premature consent beyond patient competence.
• To propose an alternative framework for understanding patient duties in shared decision-making.
• To explore how premature consent impacts the integrity of the medical profession.

Main Methods:

• Conceptual analysis of 'premature consent' as defined by J.K. Davis.
• Ethical argumentation regarding patient duties and professional integrity.
• Exploration of shared decision-making principles and good-faith engagement.

Main Results:

• Premature consent does not necessarily imply patient incompetence or misinformation.
• A more sustainable view is that premature consent threatens medical professional integrity.
• Patients have a negative duty not to obstruct HCPs and a positive duty for good-faith engagement.

Conclusions:

• Premature consent patients fail to uphold their duty of good-faith engagement in shared decision-making.
• This failure stems from an unwillingness to revise certain core evaluative bases.
• Respecting professional integrity necessitates patient participation that is open to revision and justification.