Informed consent.

Abstract

Disclosure of information prior to consent is a very complex area of medical ethics. On the surface it would seem to be quite clear cut, but on closer inspection the scope for 'grey areas' is vast. In practice, however, it could be argued that the number of cases that result in complaint or litigation is comparatively small. However, this does not mean that wrong decisions or unethical scenarios do not occur. It would seem that in clinical practice these ethical grey areas concerning patients' full knowledge of their condition or treatment are quite common. One of the barometers for how much disclosure should be given prior to consent could be the feedback obtained from the patients. Are they asking relevant questions pertinent to their condition and do they show a good understanding of the options available? This should be seen as a positive trait and should be welcomed by the healthcare professionals. Ultimately it gives patients greater autonomy and the healthcare professional can expand and build on the patient's knowledge as well as allay fears perhaps based on wrongly held information. Greater communication with the patient would help the healthcare professional pitch their explanations at the right level. Every case and scenario is different and unique and deserves to be treated as such. Studies have shown that most patients can understand their medical condition and treatment provided communication has been thorough (Gillon 1996). It is in the patients' best interests to feel comfortable with the level of disclosure offered to them. It can only foster greater trust and respect between them and the healthcare profession which has to be mutually beneficial to both parties.