The parameters of informed consent

Edward L. Raab, Richard L. Abbott, Robert C. Drews, Dennis M. Robertson, Arthur Jampolsky, David L. Guyton, David R. Stager

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Purpose: To describe the components of a proper informed consent; which risks must be disclosed and which need not; additional safeguards for incapacitated persons, minors, and research subjects; and where the law will imply consent that is not otherwise obtained. Methods: Summarization of current law obtained from legal treatises, reports of recent cases, and personal experience as a reviewer and expert. Results: Lack of informed consent can reinforce a claim of medical malpractice or serve as an alternative point of attack when the case is otherwise weak. Special requirements must be met when patients are the subjects of clinical research. Conclusion: Demonstration of a well-conducted process, not merely of a paper, not only protects the physician from exposure to liability, but increases the patient's autonomy in decisions concerning health and encourages compliance with treatment.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)225-232
Number of pages8
JournalTransactions of the American Ophthalmological Society
Volume102
StatePublished - Dec 1 2004
Externally publishedYes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'The parameters of informed consent'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this