患者参与治疗决策的权利:选择、咨询和知识

E. Cave, Nina Reinach
{"title":"患者参与治疗决策的权利:选择、咨询和知识","authors":"E. Cave, Nina Reinach","doi":"10.7590/221354019X15678416128130","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights supports the right to participate in decisions that affect our lives. Article 8 was a relevant factor in the Supreme Court decision of Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] which makes significant advances in patient-centred\n care. Focusing on adult patients with capacity, this article considers Article 8's influence across three routes to participatory protection: the right to choose, the duty to consult, and the right to know. We set out current limitations of the right to choose and consider the potential for\n Article 8 to influence the extension of a wider duty to consult and right to know. We find that there are impediments to legal development. Patient status leads to the elevation of aspects of participation that do not always comply with patient needs and expectations. We consider a reimagining\n of our expectations of patient rights to better acknowledge the relevance of partnership between patients and professional experts and to extend information provision beyond informed consent.","PeriodicalId":91323,"journal":{"name":"Journal of medical law and ethics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patient Rights to Participate in Treatment Decisions: Choice, Consultation and Knowledge\",\"authors\":\"E. Cave, Nina Reinach\",\"doi\":\"10.7590/221354019X15678416128130\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights supports the right to participate in decisions that affect our lives. Article 8 was a relevant factor in the Supreme Court decision of Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] which makes significant advances in patient-centred\\n care. Focusing on adult patients with capacity, this article considers Article 8's influence across three routes to participatory protection: the right to choose, the duty to consult, and the right to know. We set out current limitations of the right to choose and consider the potential for\\n Article 8 to influence the extension of a wider duty to consult and right to know. We find that there are impediments to legal development. Patient status leads to the elevation of aspects of participation that do not always comply with patient needs and expectations. We consider a reimagining\\n of our expectations of patient rights to better acknowledge the relevance of partnership between patients and professional experts and to extend information provision beyond informed consent.\",\"PeriodicalId\":91323,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of medical law and ethics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of medical law and ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7590/221354019X15678416128130\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of medical law and ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7590/221354019X15678416128130","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

《欧洲人权公约》第8条支持参与影响我们生活的决定的权利。在蒙哥马利诉拉纳克郡卫生委员会[2015年]一案中,第8条是最高法院判决的一个相关因素,该判决在以患者为中心的护理方面取得了重大进展。本文以有能力的成年患者为研究对象,从参与性保护的三个方面考察了第8条的影响:选择权、咨询义务和知情权。我们列出了目前对选择权的限制,并考虑了第8条对扩大更广泛的协商义务和知情权的潜在影响。我们发现法律发展存在障碍。患者状态导致参与的方面并不总是符合患者的需求和期望的提升。我们考虑重新设想我们对患者权利的期望,以更好地承认患者和专业专家之间伙伴关系的相关性,并将信息提供扩展到知情同意之外。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Patient Rights to Participate in Treatment Decisions: Choice, Consultation and Knowledge
Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights supports the right to participate in decisions that affect our lives. Article 8 was a relevant factor in the Supreme Court decision of Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] which makes significant advances in patient-centred care. Focusing on adult patients with capacity, this article considers Article 8's influence across three routes to participatory protection: the right to choose, the duty to consult, and the right to know. We set out current limitations of the right to choose and consider the potential for Article 8 to influence the extension of a wider duty to consult and right to know. We find that there are impediments to legal development. Patient status leads to the elevation of aspects of participation that do not always comply with patient needs and expectations. We consider a reimagining of our expectations of patient rights to better acknowledge the relevance of partnership between patients and professional experts and to extend information provision beyond informed consent.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
8. Reproduction Personal responsibility for health: the impact of digitalisation Prologue: Reflections on an Accidental Journey What's in a Name? Labelling Effects on Analysis of the Role of Law in Health Health Law in the UK as a Subset of Human Rights Law: Idealistic Aspiration or Coherent Reality?
×
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