Consent

I read with great interest an article written by Dr Yunus Gul titled "Consent" which was uploded on MMC's website. The description of the case was apt as it addresses the pertinent issue of patient's right to all relevant information (i.e. medical information) communicated in a comprehensible manner. I very much concur to the need for an explanation by the physician on the procedure to be undertaken and its inherent risks and benefits. The physician should be conversant enough to explain the medical jargons in non-technical terms to facilitate understanding, hence, enlighten the patient as to what lies ahead during surgery and post-surgical treatment.

It is not uncommon for patient to disagree to the recommended procedure but a patient who is in pain would just agree to the proposed treatment, without agreeing to seek a second opinion . The article suggested that signature in the consent form merely indicated the patient had made informed decision about undergoing proposed treatment. Thefore, the call for physicians to explain about the treatment in a manner that promotes understanding would somehow reduce the risks of claim or complaint by the patient on the physician, although at most times, physicians are acting in the best interest of the patient.