Introduction

Abstract

Informed consent literatures have prospered in the past decades. However, they have centred mainly on disclosure of risks of one particular treatment/procedure proposed by a doctor. There is a need to explore the topic of the duty to inform patients of alternatives. In the common law world, there are significant differences between jurisdictions with regard to whether a doctor has a legal duty to inform about alternatives, and what kinds of alternatives fall within a doctor’s duty to inform. This book covers the law of a wide range of jurisdictions, including England, the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan and China. The first few chapters (Chaps. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8) examine the collective wisdom and experience of a few common law jurisdictions. Chapters 9 and 10 examine the New Zealand context and the Chinese context. To highlight the uniqueness of the New Zealand context, in Chap. 9 distinctions are drawn between New Zealand and the three common law jurisdictions with which it is most commonly compared (England, Canada and Australia).