title: The right not to know and coronary angiography: is the common law of Australia consistent with patients' wishes?
abstract: In "The Right Not to Know: Patient Autonomy or Medical Paternalism?" (2000) 7 JLM 286 Judy Gutman qualitatively examined the direction of the law relating to the duty of medical practitioners to disclose information to their patients about risks associated with medical treatment. Prompted by theoretical issues raised in that article, a quantitative study was performed. The study focused on the wishes of patients referred for coronary angiography regarding information about the risks inherent in that procedure. The results of the study contribute to the ongoing academic discussion about risk disclosure and consent to medical treatment and demonstrate a need for further empirical research in the area. The study also highlights the desirability of clinical medical practice conforming to the tenets of the common law and vice versa.
authors.affiliation: La Trobe Law, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Vic., Australia.
authors.forename: Judy
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Gutman
authors.forename: Jack
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Gutman
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D001315:Australia; D017023:Coronary Angiography / Q000009:adverse effects*; D030881:Disclosure; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007258:Informed Consent; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D010358:Patient Participation; D028701:Patient Rights; D026684:Personal Autonomy; D010817:Physician-Patient Relations; D010820:Physicians / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D018570:Risk Assessment; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires