Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Informed Consent—The Rebuttal

Informed Consent—The Rebuttal I HAVE found Don Harper Mills1 article, "Whither Informed Consent?" to be a fine recounting of the doctrine of informed consent and of the implications of the doctrine for daily medical practice. There are, however, a few aspects of the article with which I must take substantial issue, for I fear that some of the advice Dr Mills gives is imprudent and could lead to untoward "legal" complications for the physicians involved. Dr Mills advises that physicians need not disclose the risks for most office procedures or minor office operations on the basis of dicta in the Cobbs2 case that excludes the necessity of disclosing the risk of allergic reaction to penicillin. I know of at least one case3 in which a physician has been found liable to a patient who suffered an allergic reaction to penicillin. The court found that the physician was negligent for failing to http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png JAMA American Medical Association

Informed Consent—The Rebuttal

Meisel, Alan
JAMA , Volume 234 (6) – Nov 10, 1975
Download PDF
1 page

Informed Consent—The Rebuttal

Abstract


I HAVE found Don Harper Mills1 article, "Whither Informed Consent?" to be a fine recounting of the doctrine of informed consent and of the implications of the doctrine for daily medical practice. There are, however, a few aspects of the article with which I must take substantial issue, for I fear that some of the advice Dr Mills gives is imprudent and could lead to untoward "legal" complications for the physicians involved.
Dr Mills advises that physicians need not...
Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-medical-association/informed-consent-the-rebuttal-luJgZlUa21

References (1)

Publisher
American Medical Association
Copyright
Copyright © 1975 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved. Applicable FARS/DFARS Restrictions Apply to Government Use.
ISSN
0098-7484
eISSN
1538-3598
DOI
10.1001/jama.1975.03260190043020
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

I HAVE found Don Harper Mills1 article, "Whither Informed Consent?" to be a fine recounting of the doctrine of informed consent and of the implications of the doctrine for daily medical practice. There are, however, a few aspects of the article with which I must take substantial issue, for I fear that some of the advice Dr Mills gives is imprudent and could lead to untoward "legal" complications for the physicians involved. Dr Mills advises that physicians need not disclose the risks for most office procedures or minor office operations on the basis of dicta in the Cobbs2 case that excludes the necessity of disclosing the risk of allergic reaction to penicillin. I know of at least one case3 in which a physician has been found liable to a patient who suffered an allergic reaction to penicillin. The court found that the physician was negligent for failing to

Journal

JAMA – American Medical Association

Published: Nov 10, 1975

There are no references for this article.