Content area
Full text
Abstract
This it the last article In the series on the legal aspects of consent.
It looks at recent guidance that has been published by the Department of Health on consent for examinations and treatment. It discusses the content of this document and covers the main principles which apply in relation to consent as highlighted in this series.
Since this series on legal aspects of consent first began the Department of Health (DoH) has published a Guide to Consent for Examination or Treatment (DoH, 2001a). This is a comprehensive document covering a wide range of situations. The appendices include the principles to be followed in applications to court when there is doubt as to the patient's capacity to consent, as well as further reading and legal references. Forms which can be used as evidence that consent has been given have been published and are to be implemented from April 2002 (DoH, 20016).
The DoH has also provided, as part of the reference guide, additional guides for relatives and carers, parents, adults, children and young people and people with learning difficulties (with helpful pictures). It also provides a single sheet entitled `12 key points on consent: the law in England' which could be put on the notice boards of wards or departmental offices in England.
This final article in the consent series attempts, in the light of the DoH guidance, to draw out the main principles which have been explored over the past 10 months.
CONSENT AS PART OF A PROCESS
The first point to emphasize is that consent is not simply a signature on a form: it is the outcome from a process of communication between clinician and patient over the nature of the treatment and investigations proposed and the risks and benefits which could occur. Communication should be a two-way process and the questions of the patient should be answered fully and honestly. The signature should be evidence that this process has been followed and that the patient consents. Consent can also be evidence by word of mouth and by non-verbal communication, but in situations where there are risks, it is preferable to obtain the patient's signature.
DISTINCTION BETWEEN TRESPASS
TO THE PERSON AND BREACH
OF THE DUTY OF CARE TO INFORM