Abstract
Informed consent requirements are ubiquitous in healthcare and are regarded as a cornerstone of ethical medical practice. Informed consent is more than merely obtaining a patient’s signature on a document; it is a continuous process that involves answering patients’ questions and providing relevant information throughout the course of treatment or as circumstances require. These requirements are fundamentally justified by the principle of respect for individual autonomy, recognizing the patient’s right to make decisions concerning his or her own health. Patients have the right to participate in decision-making regarding their healthcare, and health professionals should strive to ensure that individuals are not treated against their will. Meaningful informed consent requires that the patient possesses decision-making capacity, is adequately informed, and makes decisions voluntarily.
The relationship between healthcare professionals and patients has generated considerable philosophical debate. Proponents of paternalism argue that interests such as life, health, and safety outweigh individual liberty and that, because medical professionals possess greater expertise, they are better positioned to make decisions that benefit patients. In contrast, advocates of individual autonomy maintain that patients have absolute rights over their bodies and health and must therefore be actively and fully involved in all decisions concerning their care. This paper adopts a middle-ground position between these competing perspectives and argues for a collaborative approach to treatment. It recommends that medical professionals, patients, and their families work together in making healthcare decisions that promote both patient welfare and respect for autonomy.
Keywords: Informed Consent, Individual Autonomy, Biomedics, Ethics, Moral Responsibility, Paternalism
Authors:
Uchechukwu Kizito Ogu PhD
Department of Educational Foundations
College of Education, Zing
ucheogu14@gmail.com
ORCID0000-0002-8869-7804