ABSTRACT
Case Scenario: Norah was in the terminal stages of cancer. She lived with her single daughter, Jane, and was being cared for by Macmillan nurses who came to see her daily. She was on a high level of morphine but still suffered considerable pain. A consultant in palliative care visited her to reassess her medication levels, but Norah found that the new medication still left her with considerable discomfort and pain. Norah asked her daughter to help her end her life. What is the law?
Subject(s)
Child Advocacy/legislation & jurisprudence , Conflict, Psychological , Divorce/legislation & jurisprudence , Informed Consent/legislation & jurisprudence , Parents/psychology , Treatment Refusal/legislation & jurisprudence , Child , Humans , Male , Tonsillectomy/legislation & jurisprudence , United KingdomSubject(s)
Health Promotion/legislation & jurisprudence , Informed Consent/legislation & jurisprudence , Intellectual Disability/psychology , Mental Competency/legislation & jurisprudence , Patient Advocacy/legislation & jurisprudence , Tissue Donors/legislation & jurisprudence , Adult , Bone Marrow Transplantation/legislation & jurisprudence , Female , Humans , United KingdomABSTRACT
Case Scenario: Miss MB required a Caesarean section in order to save her fetus. However, while she gave consent to the operation, she suffered from a needle phobia which caused her to panic and refuse the preliminary anaesthetic. The trust applied for a declaration that the Caesarean section could take place on the grounds that the needle phobia rendered her mentally incapacitated and therefore the operation should proceed in her best interests (Re MB (an adult: medical treatment), [1997]).
Subject(s)
Cesarean Section/legislation & jurisprudence , Informed Consent/legislation & jurisprudence , Mental Competency/legislation & jurisprudence , Pregnant Women , Treatment Refusal/legislation & jurisprudence , Adult , Female , Humans , Pregnancy , United KingdomABSTRACT
Case Scenario: Alice is now 12 years old and has been receiving dialysis for over 3 years. Her long-term chance of survival depends upon a kidney transplant and she has been on a waiting list for several years. Her condition is deteriorating and Bob, a close friend of her family, has offered to donate her a kidney. What is the law?
Subject(s)
Living Donors/legislation & jurisprudence , Organ Transplantation/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Tissue Donors/legislation & jurisprudence , United KingdomSubject(s)
Health Care Reform/legislation & jurisprudence , Mental Health Services/legislation & jurisprudence , Commitment of Mentally Ill/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Mental Health Services/standards , Patient Advocacy/legislation & jurisprudence , Politics , Public Health/legislation & jurisprudence , United KingdomSubject(s)
Amputation, Surgical/legislation & jurisprudence , Hand Injuries/surgery , Informed Consent/legislation & jurisprudence , Mental Competency/legislation & jurisprudence , Treatment Refusal/legislation & jurisprudence , Adult , Amputation, Surgical/psychology , Hand Injuries/psychology , Humans , Male , Malpractice/legislation & jurisprudence , United KingdomSubject(s)
Amputation, Surgical/legislation & jurisprudence , Informed Consent/legislation & jurisprudence , Leg Ulcer/etiology , Mental Competency/legislation & jurisprudence , Schizophrenia, Paranoid/complications , Treatment Refusal/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Leg Ulcer/surgery , Male , United KingdomSubject(s)
Informed Consent/legislation & jurisprudence , Patient Education as Topic/legislation & jurisprudence , Preoperative Care/legislation & jurisprudence , Preoperative Care/nursing , Surgical Procedures, Operative/adverse effects , Surgical Procedures, Operative/legislation & jurisprudence , Anxiety/etiology , Anxiety/nursing , Fear , Humans , Male , Nurse's Role , Preoperative Care/psychology , Preoperative Care/standards , Risk Factors , Surgical Procedures, Operative/nursing , Surgical Procedures, Operative/psychology , Truth Disclosure , United Kingdom , Waiting ListsABSTRACT
Mary, following preoperative medication, was taken to theatre for a biopsy for possible breast cancer. When the theatre staff went through their checklist they could not find a consent form. The consultant surgeon said that he had seen her in the outpatients' department 2 weeks before and she had given a clear consent, not only for the biopsy but also for a radical mastectomy should the results show that to be necessary. He said that he had no problems with continuing the operation. The theatre sister was unsure of the legal position.
Subject(s)
Biopsy , Documentation , Informed Consent/legislation & jurisprudence , Mastectomy, Radical/legislation & jurisprudence , Medical Records/legislation & jurisprudence , Operating Room Nursing/legislation & jurisprudence , Biopsy/psychology , Documentation/standards , Female , Humans , Mastectomy, Radical/psychology , Medical Records/standards , Nonverbal Communication , Patient Advocacy/legislation & jurisprudence , United KingdomABSTRACT
Mrs Pearce was expecting her sixth child. The expected date of delivery was 13 November 1991. On 27 November when she saw the consultant the baby had still not arrived. She begged the doctor to induce her or to carry out a caesarean. He preferred to let nature take its course, and explained to her the risks of induction and a caesarean section. The baby died in utero sometime between 2 and 3 December. The delivery of a stillborn baby was induced on 4 December. She brought an action alleging that the consultant should have advised her of the increased risk of stillbirth as a result of the delay in delivery between 13 November and 27 November (Pearce v United Bristol Healthcare NHS Trust, 1998).
Subject(s)
Informed Consent/legislation & jurisprudence , Malpractice/legislation & jurisprudence , Patient Education as Topic/legislation & jurisprudence , Pregnancy, Prolonged , Cesarean Section/legislation & jurisprudence , Female , Fetal Death/prevention & control , Humans , Obstetrics/legislation & jurisprudence , Obstetrics/standards , Patient Education as Topic/standards , Patient Selection , Pregnancy , United KingdomSubject(s)
Advance Directives/legislation & jurisprudence , Informed Consent/legislation & jurisprudence , Mental Competency/legislation & jurisprudence , Adult , Aged , Confusion/therapy , Family , Female , Humans , Intellectual Disability/therapy , Male , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Patient Advocacy/legislation & jurisprudence , Treatment Refusal/legislation & jurisprudence , United KingdomABSTRACT
Case Scenario: Since watching a programme on dementia on the television, Sam had always been terrified of losing his mental faculties. He therefore told his daughter that if he ever suffered from a disease which lead to mental incapacity he would not wish to have any treatment. Some years later early signs of motor neurone's disease appeared and his condition worsened rapidly. He became incapable of swallowing and his mind deteriorated, so he was no longer able to express his views. His daughter told the healthcare staff at the hospital about his previous wishes and said that he would not wish to be fed artificially. Would staff be justified in giving him artificial feeding, contrary to the daughter's views?
Subject(s)
Advance Directive Adherence/legislation & jurisprudence , Living Wills/legislation & jurisprudence , Family , Female , Humans , Male , Pregnancy , United KingdomABSTRACT
Case Scenario: Mary had cared for her invalid mentally infirm mother for many years and was determined that if she ever lost her own mental capacity she would not wish to be kept alive. She drew up a document, witnessed by her sister, that stated in the event of her suffering from any form of mental incapacity she would not wish to be fed or have any medical or nursing intervention. Some years later she began to suffer from the early signs of Alzheimer's disease. Her sister had died, but staff were aware that Mary still carried this living will on her person. She is now refusing all food. What is the law?
