Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.572182
Title: Protecting self-determination in healthcare : a comparative study of the consent model and a novel property model
Author: Edozien, Leroy Chuma
Awarding Body: University of Glasgow
Current Institution: University of Glasgow
Date of Award: 2013
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Access from Institution:
Abstract:
It is generally accepted in legal and bioethical discourse that the patient has a right to self-determination. The competent patient should be in a position to make informed decisions about his/her care. In practice, this is often not the case. Paternalism, the approach to medical practice that left decision-making in the hands of the doctor, is waning and it is increasingly recognised in both the legal and medical arenas that there are values other than medical factors which determine the choices that patients make. Unfortunately, these developments have not resulted in huge advances for patient self-determination. This is largely because the mechanism by which the law purports to protect self-determination – the consent model – has fundamental flaws that constrain its effectiveness. In the last three decades, various attempts have been made to reconceptualise consent on order to make it fit for purpose, but these have achieved only limited success. This thesis starts with the premise that it is often more productive to consider what an alternative model has to offer, than to persist with amelioration of a model that is fundamentally flawed. The limitations of the consent model are discussed and a novel model, the property model, is advocated. The theoretical underpinnings of this model and its structure are presented. Essentially, the patient’s bodily integrity is protected from unauthorised invasion, and his/her legitimate expectation to be provided with the relevant information and opportunity to enable him/her make an informed decision regarding treatment is taken to be a proprietary right. It is argued that the property model potentially overcomes the limitations of the consent model, including the obstacle caused by the requirement to prove causation in consent cases. The property model provides a means by which the patient’s right to self-determination can be recognised as a distinct legal right. The model does not create new rights, only seeking to afford stronger protection of an existing right. No constitutional, professional, or other conflict is generated by applying property analysis to patient self-determination. The model fits with the rights-based approach that the courts have evolved in UK consent cases, and is consistent with modern medical professionalism.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.572182  DOI: Not available
Keywords: K Law (General)
Share: