Love as a Journey in the Informed Consent Context: Legal Abortion in England and Wales as a Case Study

C. Milo
{"title":"Love as a Journey in the Informed Consent Context: Legal Abortion in England and Wales as a Case Study","authors":"C. Milo","doi":"10.1080/20502877.2022.2067627","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The right to informed consent (IC), as established in the Supreme Court judgment in Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] UKSC 11, I claim involves a ‘journey of love’ between clinicians and patients. The latter entails a process of dialogue and support between the parties, concerning disclosure of risks, benefits and alternatives to medical treatment(s). In this paper, I first claim that IC, in the light of the spirit of Montgomery, is predicated upon two pillars, namely patients’ autonomy and medical partnership. I will then explore a case study: the case of legal abortion in England and Wales. Regarding this case, the progressive reduction of medical involvement has meant that little opportunity has been provided for this ‘journey’ to be unpacked in a medical context. I will ultimately claim that more needs to be done to safeguard IC as a ‘journey of love’ through valuing both patients’ autonomy and medical partnership.","PeriodicalId":43760,"journal":{"name":"New Bioethics-A Multidisciplinary Journal of Biotechnology and the Body","volume":"28 1","pages":"208 - 222"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Bioethics-A Multidisciplinary Journal of Biotechnology and the Body","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20502877.2022.2067627","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The right to informed consent (IC), as established in the Supreme Court judgment in Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] UKSC 11, I claim involves a ‘journey of love’ between clinicians and patients. The latter entails a process of dialogue and support between the parties, concerning disclosure of risks, benefits and alternatives to medical treatment(s). In this paper, I first claim that IC, in the light of the spirit of Montgomery, is predicated upon two pillars, namely patients’ autonomy and medical partnership. I will then explore a case study: the case of legal abortion in England and Wales. Regarding this case, the progressive reduction of medical involvement has meant that little opportunity has been provided for this ‘journey’ to be unpacked in a medical context. I will ultimately claim that more needs to be done to safeguard IC as a ‘journey of love’ through valuing both patients’ autonomy and medical partnership.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
知情同意背景下的爱之旅:以英格兰和威尔士的合法堕胎为例
我声称,最高法院在Montgomery诉Lanarkshire Health Board[2015]UKSC 11案的判决中确立的知情同意权(IC)涉及临床医生和患者之间的“爱的旅程”。后者涉及各方之间的对话和支持过程,涉及披露风险、益处和医疗替代方案。在本文中,我首先声称,根据蒙哥马利的精神,IC建立在两个支柱之上,即患者的自主性和医疗伙伴关系。然后,我将探讨一个案例研究:英格兰和威尔士的合法堕胎案例。关于这个案例,医疗参与的逐渐减少意味着几乎没有机会在医学背景下展开这段“旅程”。我最终会声称,需要做更多的工作,通过重视患者的自主性和医疗伙伴关系,来保护IC作为一次“爱的旅程”。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
16.70%
发文量
45
期刊最新文献
A quantitative analysis of stored frozen surplus embryos in the UK. Moral Distress and its Impact on Healthcare Workers in a European NICU. Artificial Intelligence for Clinical Decision-Making: Gross Negligence Manslaughter and Corporate Manslaughter. Machine learning, healthcare resource allocation, and patient consent. The Fertility Fix: the Boom in Facial-matching Algorithms for Donor Selection in Assisted Reproduction in Spain.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1