Montgomery on informed consent: An inexpert decision?

Journal of Medical Ethics

Volumn 42, Issue 2, 2016, Pages 89-94

  Montgomery, Jonathan ^a   Montgomery, Elsa ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; ETHICS; EXPERT WITNESS; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; LEGISLATION AND JURISPRUDENCE; MEDICAL ETHICS; PATERNALISM; PERSONAL AUTONOMY; SCOTLAND; STEREOTYPING;

DECISION MAKING; DISCLOSURE; ETHICS, MEDICAL; EXPERT TESTIMONY; HUMANS; INFORMED CONSENT; PATERNALISM; PERSONAL AUTONOMY; PHYSICIAN-PATIENT RELATIONS; SCOTLAND; STEREOTYPING;

EID: 84958672559     PISSN: 03066800     EISSN: 14734257     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2015-102862     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board (2015) UKSC 11.
2. Edozien LC. UK law on consent finally embraces the prudent patient standard. BMJ 2015;350:h2877.
3. Heywood R. R.I.P. Sidaway: patient orientated disclosure-a standard worth waiting for? Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board (2015) UKSC 11. Med L Rev 2015;23 (3):455-66.
4. Benner P. From novice to expert: excellence and power in clinical nursing practice. Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley, 1984.
5. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority (1997) 4 All ER 771.
6. NM v Lanarkshire Health Board (2013) CSIH 3.
7. Nadine Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board (2010) CSOH 104.
8. Kelly MP, Moore TA. The judgement process in evidence-based medicine and health technology assessment. Soc Theory Health 2012;10:1-19.
9. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Green-top Guideline No. 42. Shoulder Dystocia. London: RCOG, 2nd edn. 2012.
10. Aintree University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v James (2013) UKSC 67.
11. R (Burke) v General Medical Council (2005) EWCA Civ 1003.
12. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Clinical Guideline 132: Caesarean Section. London: NICE, 2011.
13. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Diabetes in pregnancy: management of diabetes and its complications from preconception to the postnatal period. London: NICE, 2015.
14. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Consent Advice No. 7: Caesarean Section. London: RCOG, 2009.
15. Gosh A, Yamoah K, Pring D. Information shared with mothers prior to caesarean section: a national audit of compliance with recommended information. J Obstet Gynaecol 2013;33:471-3.
16. Torjesen I. Any pregnant woman who wants a caesarean section should not be denied it, says NICE. BMJ 2011;343:d7632.
17. Salvatore S. Re: Caesarean section: summary of updated NICE guidance-Ceasarean Section: a woman's right? BMJ 2011;343:d7108.
18. Stutchfield P. Re: Caesarean section: summary of updated NICE guidance-Maternal request for caesarean section: risks to baby overlooked by NICE. BMJ 2011;343:d7108.
19. Turner M. Should women be able to request a caesarean section? Yes. BMJ 2011;343:d7570.
20. Rouhe H. Should women be able to request a caesarean section? No. BMJ 2011;343:d7565.
21. Maynard v West Midlands Regional Health Authority (1985) 1 All ER 635.
22. Sidaway v Bethlem Royal Hospital Governors (1985) A All ER 643.
23. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WC, Gray JAM. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ 1996;312:71-2.
24. Greenhalgh T, Howick J, Maskrey N. Evidence based medicine: a movement in crisis? BMJ 2014;348:g3725.
25. Kelly MP, Heath I, Howick J, et al. The importance of values in evidence-based medicine. BMC Med Ethics 2015;16:69.
26. Benner P. Using the Dreyfus model of skill acquisition to describe and interpret skill acquisition and clinical judgment in nursing practice and education. Bull Sci Technol Soc 2004;24:188-99.
27. Montgomery K. How doctors think: clinical judgement and the practice of medicine. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.
28. Dreyfus HL, Dreyfus SE. Mind over machine: the power of human intuition and expertise in the era of the computer. Oxford: Blackwell, 1986.
29. MacIntyre A. After virtue. London: Bloomsbury, 1981.
30. Greenhalgh T. Why do we always end up here? Evidence-based medicine's conceptual cul-de-sacs and some off-road alternative routes. J Primary Health Care 2012;4:92-7.
31. R (Tracey) v Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and another (Equality and Human Rights Commission and another, interveners) (2014) EWCA Civ 822.
32. Montgomery v Lanarkshire HB (2007) CSOH 172.
33. General Medical Council. Consent guidance: patients and doctors making decisions together. London: GMC, 2008.