C54895: Litigation and the practitioner - part 5

This series of articles is concerned with key areas of accountability of the optometric/optical practitioner in England. However, many aspects have similarities, or indeed apply in other parts of the UK, and to business registrants of the General Optical Council (GOC). It is not a substitute for formal legal counsel.

This article will consider practitioner accountability for patient consent and disclosure, and its transformation from peer-view ‘consent’ into patient-view ‘informed consent’ over a period of 58 years as a result of court judgements handed down on seven landmark cases from 1957 onwards. In seeking to understand this metamorphosis it is necessary firstly to introduce the notion of a ‘disclosure claim’. This arises when a patient alleges that had they been informed about the risks associated with a particular procedure, intervention or treatment option, they would have declined it, delayed it, or selected an alternative, given the choice. This is different to other clinical negligence claims in that determining what information to provide to the patient does not involve use of clinical skills.