Informed Consent Case Study

Things that are good: a warm summer day, apple pie, family time, and informed consent. The most important goal of informed consent is that the patient has an opportunity to be an informed participant in her health care decisions. At the same time patients want to limit access to information about themselves, they are equally concerned about the mirror image of this information management problem – how to gain access to the facts needed for making informed judgments about treatments, physicians, and health care plans (Yount, 2001).

Today, throughout the United States, physicians are legally required to provide this information and obtain written consent before carrying out any major medical procedure (Yount, 2001). Those who fail to do so can

Val Jones (2012) notes that the idea of the informed shared medical decision is “as old as the Hippocratic Oath”, but its widespread adoption would “create an extra layer of bureaucracy” (Jones, 2012). In order to understand the validity of this claim, it is recommended to take a look into the innovation. The main idea underlying the informed shared medical decision is that patients should be informed by independent consultants who would help them to make more accurate decision regarding medical interventions. It is suggested that experts hired by a health insurance company or government agency are more objective in their recommendations, when compared to doctors who are familiar with the nuances of an individual’s case (Jones, 2012). Despite the apparent validity of this assertion, the shared medical decision has a number of limitations that make informed consent a practice harmful for health care institutions. An important limitation is that the informed shared medical decision undermines the reputation of a health care institution. Patients are encouraged to believe that their physicians are interested in carrying out unnecessary operations, and they need an assistance of some external expert to identify whether the suggested interventions are justified, and not just “the surgeons’ need to line…pockets” (Jones, 2012). The lack of a patient’s trust in the doctor is suggested to have negative effects on the outcomes of the treatment process. Moreover, the informed shared medical decision undermines health care facilities’ work through imposing an additional financial burden on patients. The emergence of the group of independent health care experts requires additional funding that would likely be included in the cost of a patient’s insurance. It is not a secret that health service is very expensive in the United States, and in 2014, around 32 million