TITLE:
Misconceptions in the Medical Profession Regarding the Doctrine of Informed Consent
AUTHORS:
Kelvin N. Christie, Maurice A. Dean, Isiah M. Lyman
KEYWORDS:
Informed Consent, Medical Setting, Healthcare, Biomedical Research, Research Setting, Human Research
JOURNAL NAME:
Beijing Law Review,
Vol.12 No.4,
December
31,
2021
ABSTRACT: This article focuses on misconceptions in healthcare regarding how the doctrine of informed consent is applied by both medical researchers and physicians. The specific misconception addressed relates to the standard of care required by medical professionals when caring for their patents. There has been a long-standing public misconception that medical researchers are held to a lower standard of care in informed consent lawsuits, than medical physicians in similar situated lawsuits. We argue that this misconception is largely attributed to the fact that statutes, ethical regulations, guidelines, and legal precedents within the medical and research profession are governed by two separate bodies of laws and regulatory guidelines. A thorough review of these two separate bodies of law and regulatory guidelines reveals that both medical researchers and physicians are held to a high standard of care in informed consent lawsuits. Our research is grounded in both primary and secondary historical, legal, and medical documentation. We rely mainly on historical, legal, and medical research and analysis to advance our argument that both medical researchers and physicians are held to a high standard of care in informed consent lawsuits.