Not so New Directions in the Law of Consent: Examining Montgomery V Lanarkshire Health Board

17 Pages Posted: 20 Dec 2016 Last revised: 7 Dec 2017

See all articles by Anne-Maree Farrell

Anne-Maree Farrell

University of Edinburgh - School of Law

Margaret Brazier

Independent

Multiple version iconThere are 2 versions of this paper

Date Written: 2016

Abstract

This paper examines the UK Supreme Court decision in Montgomery v. Lanarkshire Health Board, which deals with consent and information disclosure in medical treatment and care. It signaled a move away from a ‘doctor knows best’ approach to one that focuses on disclosing information to which particular patients would attach significance.

Notwithstanding concerns about increased litigation and loss of professional autonomy, the reality is that the decision will make little difference to healthcare practice and consent in the UK. The Supreme Court has endorsed a view that most lawyers and doctors thought already prevailed, and it reflects the General Medical Council's guidance on the issue of consent in any case. Given recent healthcare scandals in the National Health Service (NHS), the Supreme Court's legal recognition of the importance of recognising patient autonomy in disclosing risks about medical treatment and care is a welcome development.

Suggested Citation

Farrell, Anne-Maree and Brazier, Margaret, Not so New Directions in the Law of Consent: Examining Montgomery V Lanarkshire Health Board (2016). 42 Journal of Medical Ethics 85, La Trobe Law School - Law & Justice Research Paper Series Paper No. 16-15, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2887119

Anne-Maree Farrell (Contact Author)

University of Edinburgh - School of Law ( email )

Edinburgh
Great Britain

Margaret Brazier

Independent ( email )

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
385
Abstract Views
1,102
Rank
92,207
PlumX Metrics