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.