Case Failing to Disclose the Aggressive Treatment: Duty of Disclosure in the Doctrine of Informed Consent
According to the right of patient autonomy, which is derived from human dignity, plans of various medical treatments can be fully explained by physicians or other medical personnel in medical institutions. Therefore, patients could share medical information, understand the risks and benefits related to medical care, and choose a plan that suits their best interests or reject a part or all of the medical behavior by following their own lifestyles or their idea of life. In order to fully exercise the right of patient autonomy, it is important whether the duty to inform and duty of disclosure by medical personnel are full and complete. However, both of them are not boundless. The scope of medical personnel’s explanation and notification should be determined according to the patient’s medical purpose and whether the patient has medical choice. When the patient has a possibility to choose between various medical treatments, the interests and risks of each one should be informed, so that the patient can make medical decisions based on his own intention. In contrast, while the most medical treatments can be adopted, but the others do more harm than good obviously, or if this treatment could threaten life and be contrary to the medical aid theme, it is still difficult to consider that there is a violation of the right of patient autonomy, even if it is not be informed, and is consequently impossible for choosing.