The case of Johnson v Kokemoor illuminates the conflict between patients’ right to informed consent and clinicians’ need to learn through practice, a conflict that possibly could be resolved through greater transparency about clinicians’ experience or experience-dependent medical fees.
Withholding information from patients during an informed consent process is ethically unacceptable. Patients may restrict the amount of information they wish to receive or designate someone else to receive the information for them.
AMA J Ethics. 2015;17(3):209-214. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2015.17.3.ecas2-1503.
Timothy K. Mackey, MAS and Bryan A. Liang, MD, JD, PhD
Studies show that clinical practice guidelines, used by an accused physician or by patients alleging a breach of standard care, have an impact on case outcomes.
According to documented studies, patients who have good relationships with their physicians are less likely to file complaints in the event of an adverse medical outcome.
An ethical case that was eventually decided in the US Supreme Court involves the right of patients to request an independent third-party review if their HMO refuses to authorize treatments or procedures deemed medically necessary.