TY - JOUR

T1 - Правовые нормы vs. представления врачей и пациентов о содержании и значении информированного согласия на медицинское вмешательство

AU - Белов, Сергей Александрович

AU - Ревазова, Екатерина Алексеевна

AU - Руднева, Екатерина Алексеевна

N1 - Funding Information: * The reported study was funded by a grant from the Russian Science Foundation, project no. 19-18-00525 “Understandability of the official Russian: legal and linguistic issues”. Publisher Copyright: © 2021 Saint Petersburg State University. All Rights Reserved.

PY - 2021

Y1 - 2021

N2 - Informed consent to medical intervention represents the principle of individual autonomy, recognized in Russian law and medical practice nearly 30 years ago, but it is still viewed as controversial and even rejected. The purpose of informed consent is to provide obligatory prior notification about the consequences and risks of a medical procedure to be performed, as well as other possible options of treatment. Based on the results of anthropological and legal studies, the article focuses on issues concerning obtaining informed consent and its interpretations, comparing the meanings attributed to the document by lawyers, government agencies, courts, as well as doctors and patients. The legal nature of the consent consists in expressing a person's will for medical intervention and his decision which cannot be made by anyone else. The meaning that patients and doctors attribute to informed consent, as shown by results of a survey and interviews, is shifting risks and responsibility for negative consequences from the medical organization to the patient. Stylistic features of the document influence its perception by ordinary citizens, resulting in fear and doubts about the doctor's qualifications. Russian courts usually follow a formal approach when judging whether the signature reflects the patient's real expressed will. Failure to understand the meaning of the document being signed, a circumstance that is sometimes cited when justifying an error in a transaction, is usually not recognized as sufficient. Although the document is formulated on behalf of the patient, he receives a ready-made text, containing information of a professional nature. This causes difficulties in the patient's understanding of the document that has been drawn up on his behalf. However, when a person argues that he signed an informed consent without understanding its content, courts often do not consider his words sufficient, thus failing to stimulate medical organizations to provide a document that is catered to ordinary people's medical and linguistic competences.

AB - Informed consent to medical intervention represents the principle of individual autonomy, recognized in Russian law and medical practice nearly 30 years ago, but it is still viewed as controversial and even rejected. The purpose of informed consent is to provide obligatory prior notification about the consequences and risks of a medical procedure to be performed, as well as other possible options of treatment. Based on the results of anthropological and legal studies, the article focuses on issues concerning obtaining informed consent and its interpretations, comparing the meanings attributed to the document by lawyers, government agencies, courts, as well as doctors and patients. The legal nature of the consent consists in expressing a person's will for medical intervention and his decision which cannot be made by anyone else. The meaning that patients and doctors attribute to informed consent, as shown by results of a survey and interviews, is shifting risks and responsibility for negative consequences from the medical organization to the patient. Stylistic features of the document influence its perception by ordinary citizens, resulting in fear and doubts about the doctor's qualifications. Russian courts usually follow a formal approach when judging whether the signature reflects the patient's real expressed will. Failure to understand the meaning of the document being signed, a circumstance that is sometimes cited when justifying an error in a transaction, is usually not recognized as sufficient. Although the document is formulated on behalf of the patient, he receives a ready-made text, containing information of a professional nature. This causes difficulties in the patient's understanding of the document that has been drawn up on his behalf. However, when a person argues that he signed an informed consent without understanding its content, courts often do not consider his words sufficient, thus failing to stimulate medical organizations to provide a document that is catered to ordinary people's medical and linguistic competences.

KW - Court practice

KW - Difficulties in understanding documents

KW - Doctors and patients

KW - Informed consent

KW - Interviews

KW - Language of legal documents

KW - Medical intervention

KW - Understandability of legal language

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85125693495&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.21638/spbu14.2021.403

DO - 10.21638/spbu14.2021.403

M3 - статья

AN - SCOPUS:85125693495

VL - 12

SP - 847

EP - 864

JO - ВЕСТНИК САНКТ-ПЕТЕРБУРГСКОГО УНИВЕРСИТЕТА. ПРАВО

JF - ВЕСТНИК САНКТ-ПЕТЕРБУРГСКОГО УНИВЕРСИТЕТА. ПРАВО

SN - 2074-1243

IS - 4

ER -