We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
"Proper Medical Purpose": Reviewing Consent and the Medical Exemption to Offences Against the Person: R v Paterson [2022] EWCA Crim 456.
- Authors
Thomas, Mark; Pegg, Samantha
- Abstract
Furthermore, there was a failure to advise the complainants as to alternative medical treatments and a failure to discuss the diagnosis and treatment of the complainants at MDT meetings. Keywords: Consent; medical procedure; surgery; deception; offences against the person EN Consent medical procedure surgery deception offences against the person 281 286 6 08/09/22 20220801 NES 220801 It has long been established that consent to a medical procedure, including surgical operations, will be valid when that procedure is performed by a medical professional (often referred to as the "medical exemption"). Conclusion The Court of Appeal found P to have deceived the complainants as to the true purpose of the medical procedures undertaken; the consent of the complainants being vitiated as a result. In light of this, it once more appears irrelevant that the complainants' consent was vitiated by the deception of P. Rather, the complainants were simply not sufficiently informed to be able to provide effective consent.
- Subjects
PATERSON (N.J.); DECEPTION; INFORMED consent (Medical law); JUDGES; LEGAL judgments; CRIMINAL law; APPELLATE courts; UNNECESSARY surgery
- Publication
Journal of Criminal Law, 2022, Vol 86, Issue 4, p281
- ISSN
0022-0183
- Publication type
Article
- DOI
10.1177/00220183221115272