Bilateral Oophorectomy without Patient’s True Consent: A Tort Liability Caused from Breaking the Medical Obligation to Disclose
Informed consent and the obligation to disclose have been recently an issue with attention to the judiciary as well as the medical faculty. Not only being fulfilled with the ethical feature, they involve in the disputes about evolutional judgment in medical praxis and the standards for judging. The case in hand is about a physician who didn’t fully disclose the risk of the operation, the alternatives and their advantages as well as disadvantages. An issue about tort is then the consequence. In the judgment in hand, the physician’s obligation to disclose was divided from the medical treatment without negligence. It violates the patient’s autonomy that the physician broke the obligation to disclose, according to which an informed consent was necessary. The physician with the hospital jointed shall have the liability to compensate for the patient’s damage that the living expenses increased and for the spiritual suffering as the non-pecuniary damage. The topics above concerning the claim rights, the subject matter of action, the legal interests of the obligation to disclose, the review standard for the tort liability and the range of the compensation would be discussed and analyzed one by one in the essay in hand.