Informed consent: court viewpoints and medical decision making

Area of Science:

• Medical Law
• Bioethics
• Decision Analysis

Background:

• Informed consent is a cornerstone of ethical medical practice.
• Legal standards for informed consent have evolved over time.
• The role of decision analysis in informed consent is increasingly recognized.

Purpose of the Study:

• To examine appellate court decisions on informed consent over 25 years in three states.
• To analyze trends and criteria in defining adequate informed consent.
• To explore the contribution of decision analysis to informed consent doctrine.

Main Methods:

• Review of 25 years of appellate court decisions from three influential states.
• Analysis of court standards evolution: medical community, reasonable person, and individual preference.
• Comparison of court decision-making with decision analysis principles.

Main Results:

• Court standards for informed consent have shifted from a medical community standard to a reasonable person standard, with emerging individual preference considerations.
• Decision analysis provides a framework for communicating medical outcomes, probabilities, and assessing patient preferences.
• The legal system could benefit from adopting a decision analytic perspective in informed consent doctrine.

Conclusions:

• The legal definition of informed consent has evolved, emphasizing patient autonomy.
• Decision analysis offers valuable tools for improving physician-patient communication regarding medical decisions.
• Further research is needed on integrating decision analysis into informed consent practices.