Medical Paternalism

DISCUSSION

General awareness on informed consent is a reasonable physician standard. It is significance noting that medical paternalism occurs to some extent in most societies of India and other countries also and probably cannot be eliminated.(10) Medical practice is a moral practice and it requires doctors to make judgment on what is best for their patients. The limitations of this study include the potential for information bias. The respondent may be providing an anticipated response that is acceptable to the researcher, instead of reflecting the actual response in a real-life situation. Other possible reasons include a small sample size or an invalid assumption. Their authority is hardly ever challenged, and their advice, seldom questioned.

The patient must be told what is to be done and why. It is essential to regard patient autonomy and his participation in health service so they could enhance their knowledge & complications about disease (12, 13). Hence, patient can accelerate his recovery by participating in decision making (1, 2). It is also a defence tool for hospital against claimants and it should have requirements, such as: presenting information to patient by attending physician, patient perception and authority, patient competency in decision making, and factors affecting on patient- physician interaction (3, 4). Patient treating without his informed consent probably can sues and consent with reluctance, fear or japery is not valid. So it is a kind of risk management and indicates responsible person (14). In taking informed consent, clinician should pursue ethics and pay their respects to patient decisions about practice and his autonomy. Consent should be voluntary and patient should have a good perception of nature of proposed practice. Because, legally, any practice without consent is equal public rights violation

Dr. Prabha Manchanda(16), Supreme Court of India has adequately answered the question. Supreme court held We therefore hold that in Medical Law, where a surgeon is consulted by a patient, and consent of the patient is taken for diagnostic procedure/surgery, such consent cannot be considered as authorisation or permission to perform therapeutic surgery either conservative or radical(except in life threatening or emergent situations). Similarly where the consent by the patient is for a particular operative surgery, it cannot be treated as consent for an unauthorized additional procedure involving removal of an organ, only on the ground that such removal is beneficial to the