title: [Informed consent or choice? An ethical dilemma in oncology practice].
abstract: How articulate information, mutidisciplinary practice, choice and decision of the treatment in a good patient-doctor relationship, an ethical relationship ? Doctor is an expert who gets the information (patients have more and more others sources of information). Choice of the treatment depends of the facts (the evidence) and personal values (the preferences). The selection between the different options (most often they are several options) may be done by the physician or by physicians in a multidisciplinary clinics, in the presence of the patient or not. The final decision to do or not the treatment belongs to the patient (who is not always aware of that). Initial sharing of the information between patient and doctor may permit the patient to choose himself the best option. More complete is sharing of the information, more the patient is able to do a free choice (without the influence of the doctor). It is often possible (genetics, prevention, screening, adjuvant treatments) to share in full the available information (knowing its relativity and limits). In oncology, the full sharing of the information is not always realistic, neither asked by the patient. Nevertheless, it is possible to go progressively with the patient to a preferred choice through a deliberative process, a co-construction of the decision. But often, the doctor refer to a pre-established protocol, build by physicians, representing the choice of the majority (doctors and/or patients) in the "same" situation. Only one option is offered to the patient from whom consent is asked, the information been then delivered to explain the choice already done. This paternalistic attitude is very effective, comfortable and don't alter the satisfaction of the majority of the patients, however, it limits the patient's autonomy. The patient is not allowed to choose between all the possibilities but accept or refuse the doctor's choice. With the extreme variability of the situations, it would be illusive to defend a unique attitude. Doctor has yet to try to adapt himself to every single case.
authors.affiliation: Centre Oscar Lambret, rue Frédéric-Combemale, BP 307, 59020 Lille. p-vennin@o-lambret.fr
authors.forename: Philippe
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Vennin
mesh_terms: D001943:Breast Neoplasms / Q000523:psychology / Q000628:therapy; D002755:Choice Behavior; D003657:Decision Making; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007258:Informed Consent; D008495:Medical Oncology / Q000941:ethics*; D008606:Mental Processes; D009362:Neoplasm Metastasis / Q000628:therapy