Annex A > Chapter 17 - Communication Between Healthcare Professionals and Patients > Guidance from professional and related bodies

Guidance from professional and related bodies

The Medical Defence Union

19 In November 1992 the MDU published its guidance on consent entitled `Consent to Treatment'. [25] On `Informed Consent', the MDU stated:

`A doctor ... or other healthcare professional has a duty to explain to the patient in non-technical language the nature, purpose and material risks (vide infra) ["see below"] of the proposed procedure. The patient must be capable of understanding the explanation given; if he is incapable, whether from unsound mind or any other cause, informed consent cannot be obtained. If the proposed treatment is difficult to understand, it may be helpful for clinicians to use, for example, drawings, diagrams and models to supplement the verbal explanations. If necessary an interpreter should be present to ensure that the explanation is given in a language which the patient comprehends. The full explanation given to the patient is of paramount importance. The signing of a consent form is of secondary significance. Where the patient has been given insufficient information, the clinician may be found to have been in breach of his duty of care to the patient.' [26]

20 The MDU guidance advised that, when obtaining consent:

`The task should not be delegated routinely to a junior doctor, especially if a complicated or specialised procedure is contemplated. It is not appropriate to ask a student to obtain consent. It is important that the person who discusses the procedure with the patient should whenever possible be the person who will carry out the procedure. If that is not possible then consent should be obtained by someone who is appropriately qualified and familiar with all the details and risks of the proposed procedure, and any alternatives.' [27]

21 As to when consent should be obtained, the MDU stated that:

`Consent should be obtained preferably a short time before the proposed procedure ... In the case of elective surgery, where no change in the basic condition requiring operative treatment is to be expected, there is no objection to obtaining the patient's signed consent during the out-patient clinic. If the patient's condition alters between the out-patient appointment and admission to hospital so there is some material change in the nature, purpose or risks of the procedure, then the patient's consent should be obtained again; a further explanation should be given and a fresh consent form should be signed. Similarly, if a considerable time has elapsed between the out-patient appointment and admission, consent should be obtained again.' [28]

<< previous | next >> | back to top

Footnotes

[25] DOH 0014 0001 - 0036 ; `Consent to Treatment', MDU

[26] DOH 0014 0002; `Consent to Treatment', MDU (emphasis in original)

[27] DOH 0014 0004; `Consent to Treatment', MDU

[28] DOH 0014 0003; `Consent to Treatment', MDU