Paciento informuotas sutikimas : teoriniai ir praktiniai aspektai

LTStraipsnyje analizuojama paciento informuoto sutikimo doktrina, kurios pagrindinis pasiekti, kad pacientai priimtų informuotus ir pagrįstus sprendimus. Duodamas informuotą sutikimą laisva valia, pacientas tuo pačiu įgyvendina savo teisę į asmens neliečiamumą, apsisprendimą ir priimti sprendimus dėl savo sveikatos priežiūros. Straipsnyje siekiama atskleisti tiek teorinę, informuoto sutikimo instituto reikšmę ir įtaką gydytojų civilinei atsakomybei. Straipsnio autorius pat iškelia tam tikrus probleminius šio instituto aspektus ir siekia raštijų sprendimo būdų. Rengiant straipsnį panaudota Lietuvos ir užsienio valstybių teisės teorinė ir praktinė medžiaga. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Pacientas; Informuotas sutikimas; Patients; Informed consent.

ENCareful diagnosis and treatment are not the only legal obligations of a physician. The physician, like others, is not allowed to treat or even touch a patient without the patient's valid consent. Any medical intervention without the patient's valid consent is considered unlawful, unless it falls within very few exceptions. Consent is considered to be valid when it is given of free of the patient with the capacity to consent, who is properly informed about the nature, risks and consequences of the proposed treatment and its alternatives including that of non-treatment. The main requirement for valid informed consent is adequate information or disclosure. When rigorously and conscientiously made, disclosure may well prove to be an invaluable means of avoiding many ethical and legal problems which potentially beset doctors and patients. In certain circumstances, disclosure, otherwise required by law, may be suspended to varying degrees under conditions such as necessity or emergency, or through the operation of a therapeutic privilege. These exceptions work on the presumption that a typical patient would wish to be cured and healed. If properly used, informed consent protects the right to bodily integrity, self-determination as well as the right of patients to make choices regarding their own health aire. Thus, the requirement for informed consent promotes two main ideals - that the decision to undergo or forego medical treatment should ultimately be that of the patient and not of his physician, and that every person has a right to determine what shall be done with his or her own body. The doctrine of informed consent as judicially and critically perceived, seeks as fully as possible to ensure that patients take responsibility for ultimate decision-making over matters which carry potentially weighty consequences for their future health and lifestyle. [From the publication]