{"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}
引用次数: 2
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
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.