Análisis del consentimiento informado y la prueba conducente respetando la autonomía del paciente

Abstract

In our country the acquainted consent is submitted with medical care, arises with the relationship “doctor-patient” and has had a long and extensive history in the legal system in order to be recognized and report the medical negligence, lack of importance and disinformation the doctor provides to patients. It esentially appears as a legal requirement and basically as a document in the context of increasingly autonomous societies that demand rights and decisions about your health, your body and your life. It is important to establish whether the information the doctor provided is very technical, because it depends on the patient’s understanding; it must be adjusted to his culture and level of understanding, with the aim of identifying difficulties with the information reported in the documents. The trial presents many types of evidence the patient may have access to; this has the effect of the judge’s statement of the responsibility of the health organization and demonstrating the importance of the clarity and expertise with which the doctor speaks to the patient. The doctor needs to focus on the way the patient feels the total confidence of undergoing treatment or, on the opposite, rejecting it because his vital state does not allow it but he needs to focus on the fact he can assume his entire decision. In order to use the consent’s document as a type of evidence in a procedure, the first things we have to determine and fix are: which is the evidence, how to prove, means of proof (expert report, document and appraisal under oath