Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-56f9d74cfd-5k9ck Total loading time: 0.268 Render date: 2022-06-27T06:08:13.127Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true }

The consent process in radiotherapy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 2007

Keisha S. Robinson*
Affiliation:
The Parkside Oncology Clinic, London, UK
*
Correspondence to: Keisha S. Robinson, The Parkside Oncology Clinic, 49 Parkside, Wimbledon, London SW19 5NB, UK. E-mail: keisha.robinson@parkside-hospital.co.uk

Abstract

Over the past two decades The Department of Health has made the consent process one of its main focus and has issued numerous guidelines on how the process must be conducted in order to make it valid. This mandate has been in accordance with the new patient-centred health service, which has patient autonomy as its fundamental standard. This paper will critically appraise the consent process in a radiotherapy department against the Department of Health’s recommendations. The ethical and legal principles governing the process will also be discussed using guidance from medical professional bodies and reference to English case law. Additionally, the function of written consent and consent forms will be assessed in order to establish whether implied or oral consent has any role in radiotherapy. The paper found that to a large extent the Department of Health’s recommendations are followed in the radiotherapy department evaluated. One key outcome arising from this paper is that written consent is the most appropriate form of consent in radiotherapy; however the record of consent should not be solely confined to a consent form. Rather it is critical that adequate notes of all areas of the dialogue that took place during the consent process with the patient should be written in the patient’s medical notes.

Type
Original Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Palmer, R.Informed consent in oncology: do we need it? Clin Oncol 1996; 8:36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Department Of Health. The NHS Cancer Plan and the New NHS Providing a Patient-Centered Service. London. DOH, 2004.Google Scholar
Department of Health. Reference Guide to Consent for Examination of Treatment. London. DOH, 2001.Google Scholar
Tait, D, Hardy, J.Consent for investigating and treating adults with cancer. Clin Oncol 2006; 18:2329.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burnett, G, Charman, SSizer, B, Murray, P.Information given to patients about adverse side effect of Radiotherapy: A survey of Patient’s views. Clin Oncol 2004; 16:479484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colyer, H. Informed consent for radiotherapy: our responsibility. Radiography 2007; 13:197–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
The General Medical Council. Seeking patient’s consent: the ethical considerations. General Medical Council, 1998.Google Scholar
The College of Radiographers.Statement for Professional Conduct. London: The College of Radiographers, 2002.Google Scholar
Kyle, G. Consent to treatment. The Royal College of Ophthalmologist, Focus Summer 2006; 5–6.Google Scholar
Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee. All England Law Report 2, London 1957.Google Scholar
Samanta, A, Samanta, J.Legal standard of care: a shift from the traditional bolam test Clin Med 2003; 3 (5):443446.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Judgements—Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority. House of Lords, London 1997.Google Scholar
The NHS Litigation Authority. NHSLA Risk Alert: Informed Consent. Nov 2004 Issue 4.Google Scholar
Chatterhorn v Gerson [1981] 1 All ER 257.Google Scholar
Department of Health: 12 Key Points on consent: the Law in England. LondonDOH 2000.Google Scholar
Kennedy, I, sGrubb, A, Medical Law: Text and Materials, 3rd edition. London: Butterworths, 2000.Google Scholar
Flemming, J.The Law of Torts. 9th edition. NSW: Law Book Company Ltd., 1998.Google Scholar

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

The consent process in radiotherapy
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

The consent process in radiotherapy
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

The consent process in radiotherapy
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *