Consenting for Medical Negligence in India - 1785 Words

CONSENTING’ FOR ‘MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE’? â€Å"The context in which the duty of risk-disclosure arises is invariably the occasion for decision as to whether a particular treatment procedure is to be undertaken. To the physician, whose training enables a self- satisfying evaluation, the answer may seem clear, but it is the prerogative of the patient, not the physician, to determine for himself the direction in which his interests seem to lie. To enable the patient to chart his course understandably, some familiarity with the therapeutic alternatives and their hazards becomes essential....† I. INTRODUCTION All kind of medical treatment involves interference with the patient’s body. This interference can always be regarded as an assault, battery or false imprisonment. For example, battery is â€Å"application of force to person by another without lawful justification†. In one of the first cases on medical negligence Justice Cardozo held that â€Å"Every human being of adult years and sound mind has right to determine what should be done with his body; and a surgeon who performs an operation without his patient’s consent commits an assault for which he is liable in damages†. A doctor is required to care for his patient and explain what he intends to do. The Indian Penal Code, 1860 sets out a few specific examples underlining the necessity of this consent. Section 88 in the Chapter on General Exceptions provides exemption for the acts done in good faith for someone’s benefit. Section