Advertisement

Abstract

This book formulates the term “alternatives” in a wide fashion. It is categorised into four groups: (1) available treatment options; (2) legally, financially or geographically unavailable treatment options; (3) alternative providers; (4) choices between conventional medicine and CAM. First, the majority of “alternatives” are “treatment options”. Second, treatment options, which are medically available, may in fact be unavailable because of non-medical (legal, financial and geographical) factors. That raises the issue of whether to disclose legally, financially or geographically unavailable treatment options. Third, a doctor’s inexperience in performing a complex procedure might expose the patient to additional risks, leading to the notion that a patient has a right to be informed of the option of having the procedure performed by alternative (more experienced) practitioners or in a better-equipped and better-staffed institution. Fourth, with the increasing prevalence of CAM, there is a pressing issue of whether a practitioner has a duty to inform about alternative therapies that are beyond the scope of their variety of “medicine”.

Keywords

Information Disclosure Civil Liability Alternative Provider Ontario Health Insurance Plan Experienced Provider 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Crozier, G.K.D., and Françoise Baylis. 2010. The ethical physician encounters international medical travel. Journal of Medical Ethics 36: 297–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Freckelton, Ian, and Kerry Petersen (eds.). 1999. Controversies in health law. Sydney: The Federation Press.Google Scholar
  3. Krause, Joan H. 1999. Reconceptualizing informed consent in an era of health care cost containment. Iowa Law Review 85: 261–386.Google Scholar
  4. Rostolsky, Brad M. 2002. Practice makes perfect: Experience-related information should fall within the purview of Pennsylvania’s doctrine of informed consent. Duquesne Law Review 40: 543.Google Scholar
  5. Terrion, Halle Fine. 1993. Informed choice: Physician’s duty to disclose non readily available alternatives. Case Western Reserve Law Review 43: 491–523.Google Scholar
  6. Twerski, Aaron D., and Neil B. Cohen. 1999. The second revolution in informed consent: Comparing physicians to each other. Northwestern University Law Review 94: 1–54.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xiju Zhao
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Law College of Social Science and HumanitiesShandong University of Traditional Chinese MedicineJinanP.R. China

Personalised recommendations