About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

16 N.Y.L. Sch. J. Hum. Rts. 933 (1999-2000)
Informed Consent: Does the First Amendment Protect a Patient's Right to Choose Alternative Treatment

handle is hein.journals/nylshr16 and id is 949 raw text is: Informed Consent: Does the First Amendment Protect a Patient's Right to Choose Alternative Treatment? INTRODUCTION Throughout the 1990s, our society witnessed significant breakthroughs and achievements in medical care.1 Despite the technological sophistication of contemporary medicine, certain established legal doctrines continue to govern interactions in the medical industry.2 Particularly, doctors and patients heavily rely upon the doctrine of informed consent, which provides that an individual has the right to determine what will be done with his or her own body.3 Although this doctrine is well established, determining the scope of the required disclosure has always presented difficulties, especially in the sphere of non-traditional alternative methods of treatment.4 In interpreting the doctrine of informed consent, the courts have faced many controversial questions. For example, if a patient wishes to have an abortion in a state that does not permit such a procedure, should her doctor be required to inform her of those states that allow abortions?6 Can a physician in a federally funded family planning clinic advise her patients of different methods of birth control and abortion?7 Should a physician be prevented from using See generally Wayne L. Pines, New Challenges For Medical Product Promotion And Its Regulation, 52 FOOD & DRUG L.J. 61 (1997). 2 See Elysa Gordon, Multiculturalism in Medical Decisionmaking: The Notion ofInformed Waiver, 23 FORDHAM URB. L.J. 1321 (1996). 3 See Schloendorffv. Society of New York Hosp., 105 N.E. 92 (N.Y. 1914). 4 See MICHAEL COHEN, COMPLIMENTARY AND ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE: LEGAL BOUNDARIES AND REGULATORY PERSPECTIVES 60 (1998) (discussing the adequacy of informed consent). 5 See id. at 60-61. 6 See generally EI-Amin v. Yale - New Haven Hosp., No. CV-900303287 (Conn. Super. Ct. 1990) (adjudicating a situation where a Connecticut resident who gave birth to to a hydrocephallic child was not informed of the alternative of abortion even though it would have been an option in a neighbouring New York). 7 See Rust v. Sullivan, 500 U.S. 173, 177-178 (1991) (upholding regulations that banned federally funded family planning clinics to provide abortion counseling to patients). 933

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most