Understanding of Informed Consent and Surgeon Liability by the Public and Patients

Abstract

Purpose. To evaluate understanding of the fundamental concepts of informed consent by the public and patients. Methods. Questionnaires were distributed to any persons (aged more than 16 years) attending the Palmerston North Hospital (excluding in-patients). The first 1000 completed questionnaires were analysed using the Chi squared test. Results. The fundamental concepts of informed consent were not appreciated by most respondents; only 18%, 13%, and 5% of them agreed with its implications in terms of self-autonomy, confidentiality, and battery, respectively. 64% of respondents preferred to take sole responsibility to decide which procedure to undergo, 31% preferred to be guided by the surgeon, and 5% by a brief explanation only. 21% of the respondents considered the surgeon liable in the event of an unmentioned rare complication, 43% considered the surgeon not liable, and 34% were undecided. Conclusion. Understanding of medico-legal implications of informed consent (e.g. self-autonomy, confidentiality, and battery) by the public and patients is poor. Their expectations regarding self-autonomy seem unrealistic. It is time for surgeons, legal experts, and the public to confer and make informed consent a practical, user-friendly tool rather than the legal obstacle that it is today.