Consent And Treatment Forms Medication Agreement: Fill & Download for Free

For any operative type procedure, including the procedures I perform in the Cardiac Cath lab consent for blood transfusion is specifically named and covered by the procedure consent obtained prior to the procedure. For a Jehovah Witness patient who has chosen to refuse even the possibility or consent for a transfusion, that line about blood transfusion has to be scratched out, blotted out from the consent form and initialed by the patient and the operator signing the consent.So all blood transfusions for anyone in the hospital requires consent. In the Emergency Room where there is no relative available to sign a consent for an incapacitated patient needing transfusion, there is an emergency procedure where two physicians sign an emergency consent for a life saving requirement to cover for a moribund patient in an emergency setting.Thus for a Jehovah Witness - as for any patient - consent for transfusion is required. If a Witness does not give consent and a severe complication occurs that could lead to death then another attempt would be made to seek consent, but if the patient refuses then the hospital staff is in a very sticky place where they can be held liable potentially for the complication that led to severe bleeding and caused the death of the patient.I was once consulted by the Defendant’s lawyer, as an outside physician for expert testimony, regarding this exact, very complicated circumstance. To tell the whole story would be breaking my confidentiality agreement, so I can’t. But I certainly learned more from that experience how careful a physician and medical staff must be where issues of personal belief can impact on emergency treatment or any treatment.

Ah the art of taking informed consent.Informed consent means that I as a doctor inform my patient about his or her diagnosis, the proposed plan of treatment, chances of success or failure, alternative treatment options and the accompanying complications.There should be no ambiguities with respect to the above. After listening to all this information, the patient is given time to process it and come to an independent agreement for the treatment procedure which is validated by his or her written acceptance with signature.These are not my thoughts or opinions. This is established by the court of law and is more or less applicable to every country in the world. If a doctor fails to obtain such a consent (except in certain circumstances) then the doctor is held responsible and negligent for any untoward incident or complication.As such a complication does not amount to medical negligence as mandated by the Supreme Court recently. [1] But the same if it happens without the patient being aware of it amounts to negligence.CASE LAW: April 18th, 2018.The above case is an example. The court ordered the doctor to pay a compensation of 5 lakhs for a complication involving a procedure not because there was negligence but because there was no consent.From the patient's point of view I agree it can be scary to read about so many potential complications and problems. Like for example a friend of mine underwent LASIK surgery for refractive errors. Her consent form had three pages. One of the complications that was listed was possible blindness. She freaked out. But her surgeon calmed her down and told her it was a formality and it is an exceedingly rare complication and she need not worry about it.Nevertheless it's a genuine fear. I completely empathize with patients too on this.So how do we address this? The doctor also needs to be protected legally and the patient also shouldn't feel cornered and intimidated.The only solution I see is to avoid getting last minute consents and discussions about complications except in absolute emergencies.In this way the patient has time to process all the information, balance out the risks and benefits, seek a second opinion if needed and then make an informed decision.Footnotes[1] Karnataka doctors hail SC ruling, say not every complication amounts to negligence | Bengaluru News - Times of India

ART clinics are legal.However, there is no law governing the functioning of the same barring a few guidelines by ICMR[1] . The ART bill is still pending and may or may not be passed any time soon.Informal agreements with patients are not illegal, but it is advisable that they be drafted by medico-legal experts. I have seen some extremely poorly drafted agreements that neither followed the basic legal principles of drafting nor covered all the medical bases.Additionally, there are specific consent forms already provided in the guidelines for doctors to clinics to use.“Welfare of the child” is a vague term. Therefore, it depends on the details of the welfare. For instance, according to ICMR guidelines, the ART physicians and clinics are required to store the records of the genetic parents of a child born through methods of ART and they are obliged to release this data when asked by the offspring on reaching majority[2] (Guideline 3.3.6)Footnotes[1] ART Clinics in India[2] http://icmr.nic.in/art/Chapter_3.pdf