This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Mazur, D. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Mazur, D. J. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Judicial and legislative Viewpoints on Physician Misestimation of Patient Dysutilities

A Problem for Decision Analysts

Appellate courts, state legislatures, and ethicists have recently (post-1972) been interested- through the evolving court doctrine of informed consent—in patient-physician joint decision making. Yet these professional groups' approaches differ markedly from that of decision analysis, failing to include an explicit role for patients' rational processing of information in informed consent. In addition, these groups charge that decision analysts are misestimating patient dysutilities. This paper examines three issues: 1) in what sense(s), if any, is decision- analytic work in individualized medical decision making misestimating patient dysutilities, 2) if this misestimation is real, whether it is an example of the normative-descriptive tensions that exist in medical decision making, and 3) in what ways do the relationships between decision-analytic and judicial decision making change when informed consent is viewed in terms of contract law as opposed to tort law. This paper argues that a key link dividing these professional groups is the differing weights given to the "value of information" by decision- analytic vs. non-decision-analytic frameworks. Key words: contract law; hazards; informed consent; legal (court, judicial) decision; malpractice; medical decision making; medical ethics; medical informed consent; medical risk; negligence; professional standards; reasonable person; tort law. (Med Decis Making 1990;10:172-180)

Medical Decision Making, Vol. 10, No. 3, 172-180 (1990)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9001000304


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Piper Jr. Truce on the Battlefield: A Proposal for a Different Approach to Medical Informed Consent J. Law Med. Ethics, December 1, 1994; 22(4): 301 - 313. [PDF]