Informed Consent

References

• See Nys, “Draagwijdte en grenzen van ‘informed consent’”, Mededelingen Provinciale Raad Orde van Geneesheren Brabant, 1995-1996, p. 11.
   Google Scholar
• See Zie Vansweevelt, Th., De civielrechtelijke aansprakelijkheid van de geneesheer in het Ziekenhuis, Antwerpen, Maklu, 1991, 206.
   Google Scholar
• See article 398 Sw.
   Google Scholar
• The statements by the doctor that he would like to carry out actions within the framework of the treatment can, with the implicit consent of the patient, be sufficient; see Vansweevelt, o.c., 207.
   Google Scholar
• See article 2 and 3 EVRM.
   Google Scholar
• See article 5 EVRM and article 12 GW.
   Google Scholar
• See Vansweevelt, o.c., 203; Rb. Nijvel, 5 September 1995, R.G.D., 1995, 299; Brussels, 24 December 1992, R.G.A.R., 1994, 12321; T.B.B.R./R.B.D.C., 1995, 211-212, with footnote from Vansweevelt, Th.
   Google Scholar
• Take good care that it is not because a medical treatment has the consent of the patient that this is justified. The principle of consent is a necessity but certainly not a sufficient condition for a medical operation. It is only when there is also therapeutic significance and when the operation follows the general conditions and possibly also following the legally specified conditions, that an operation with the consent of the patient will be justified.
   Google Scholar
• See articles 372-378, 392-433, 453-457 Sw.
   Google Scholar
• See Vansweevelt, Th., o.c., 264.
   Google Scholar
• See article 1134, al. 3, B.W.; see Vansweevelt, Th., o.c., no. 264.
   Google Scholar
• See Memorie van Toelichting bij het Verdrag Biogeneeskunde, no.…
   Google Scholar
• See Brussels, 24 December 1992, R.J.A.R., 1994, 12328; T.B.B.R./R.J.D.C., 1995, 208, with footnote from Vansweevelt, Th.; see also Rb. Antwerpen, 13 May 1993, T.Gez./Rev. Dr. Santé, 1996-1997, 190, with footnote from Colette-Basecqz N., and Verhaegen, M.-N.
   Google Scholar
• See Colette-Basecqz N. and Verhaegen M.-N., “Le devoir d’information du médecin et le consentement libre et éclairé du patient”, footnote under Liège, 20 October 1994, T.Gez./Rev. Dr. Santé, 1996-1997, 186.
   Google Scholar
• See Rb Antwerp, 13 May 1993, T.Gez./Rev. Dr. Santé, 1996-1997, 190.
   Google Scholar
• See Antwerp, 9 November 1987, R. W., 1987-1988, 1336, with footnote from Vansweevelt, Th.
   Google Scholar
• This, however, does not relieve the individual health provider from the obligation to give information, Hennau-Hublet, …, 488.
   Google Scholar
• See Vansweevelt, Th., o.c., 307.
   Google Scholar
• According to Nys, nursing and paramedical information can be given regarding the treatments that they can legally do; see Nys, H., Geneeskunde, Recht en medisch handelen, Brussels, E. Story Scientia, 1991, 121 (check).
   Google Scholar
• See also Vansweevelt, Th.
   Google Scholar
• See article 5 of the Verdrag Biogeneeskunde.
   Google Scholar
• See Ghent, 11 March 1992, T.Gez./Rev. Dr. Santé, 1995-1996, 58 with footnote from Vansweevelt, Th.
   Google Scholar
• See Ghent, 11 March 1992, T.Gez./Rev. Dr. Santé, 1995-1996, 58 with footnote from Vansweevelt, Th.
   Google Scholar
• See also Vansweevelt, T.B.B.R./R.J.D.C., …, 309.
   Google Scholar
• T.Gez./Rev. Dr. Santé, 1996-1997, 192.
   Google Scholar
• See Verdrag Biogeneeskunde, commentary no. 36.
   Google Scholar
• See Fagnart, 264.
   Google Scholar
• See article 5 Verdrag Biogeneeskunde.
   Google Scholar
• See Vansweevelt, Th., o.c., 312.
   Google Scholar
• See Verdrag Biogeneeskunde, commentary no. 34.
   Google Scholar
• See Verdrag Biogeneeskunde, commentary no. 34.
   Google Scholar
• See for example, Rb. Nijvel, 5 September 1995, R.R.D., 1995, 298.
   Google Scholar
• See Vansweevelt, Th., o.c., 315.
   Google Scholar
• Only the reasonable alternative treatments must be notified.
   Google Scholar
• See Rb. Brussels, 5 May 1995, J.L.M.B., 1996, 431: a patient with gastro-enteritis had a caloscopy performed and had not been advised of the risk of perforation. The judge ruled that they were talking about a very exceptional risk for which notification was not necessary. Contra: Rb. Nijvel, 5 September 1995, R.R.D. 1995 299.
   Google Scholar
• See Brussels 21 June 1967, G.T., 1968, 27.
   Google Scholar
• See Antwerp, 9 November 1987, R. W., 1987-1988, 1336 with footnote from Vansweevelt, Th.
   Google Scholar
• Rb. Nijvel, 5 September 1995, R.R.D., 1995, 298.
   Google Scholar
• See Vansweevelt, Th., l.c., 329.
   Google Scholar
• See Verdrag Biogeneskunde, commentary no. 35.
   Google Scholar
• See Vansweevelt, Th., l.c., 335.
   Google Scholar
• See Vansweevelt, Th., l.c., 322.
   Google Scholar
• See Vansweevelt, Th., l.c., 291.
   Google Scholar
• See Fagnart, 242.
   Google Scholar
• See Brussels, 24 December 1992, R.J.D.C., 1995, 208, with footnote from van Vansweevelt, Th., R.J.A.R., 1994, 123828; Ghent, 11 March 1992, T.Gez./Rev. Dr Santé, 1995-1996, 54, with footnote from van Vansweevelt, Th.
   Google Scholar
• See previous note Vansweevelt, Th., …
   Google Scholar
• See Ghent, 11 March 1992.
   Google Scholar
• This judgement therefore confirms the view of Vansweevelt, according to which a doctor can only enlarge or change his planned operation without the consent of a patient in the case of an emergency situation (see Vansweevelt, Th., o.c., 256). This means that the violation must be dictated by its urgency, that the enlargement of the operation can only be if, without the operation, and within the borders of safe probability, the patient would die within a short foreseeable time and if an interruption of the operation would bring with it new complications or risks and finally, the operation will be interrupted if the unforeseen additional injury involves no immediate damage.
   Google Scholar
• See Verdrag Biogeneeskunde, commentary no. 37.
   Google Scholar
• See article 8, §2 of the law of 13 June 1986; for abortion, see article 350 Strafwb.
   Google Scholar
• See Verdrag Biogeneeskunde, commentary no. 37.
   Google Scholar
• See for normal risk-free treatments and tacit consent: Rb. Brussels, 5 May 1995, J.L.M.B., 1996, 431.
   Google Scholar
• See article 5, §2 Verdrag Biogeneeskunde.
   Google Scholar
• See Verdrag Biogeneeskunde, commentary no. 38.
   Google Scholar
• See article 1315, §1 B.W.; see also Vansweevelt, …
   Google Scholar
• See Cass, 25 February 1995, R.J.A.R., 1997, 12858.
   Google Scholar
• See Rb. Nijvel, 5 September 1995, R.J.D., 1995, 300; see, in a sense, also Rb. Antwerp, 13 May 1993, T.Gez./Rev. Dr. Santé, …, 192.
   Google Scholar
• See Rb. Antwerp, 26 February 1992, T.B.B.R., 1993, 401; see Rb. Kortrijk, 3 January 1989, R.W., 1988-1989, 1171.
   Google Scholar
• See Antwerp, 15 June 1994, T.Gez./Rev. Dr. Santé, 1996-1997, 358 with footnote from Ter Heerdt, J.; see also Colette: 188.
   Google Scholar
• See, for example, Rb. Brussels, 5 May 1995, G.L.M.B., 1996,431.
   Google Scholar
• See Vansweevelt, Th., l.c., 347.
   Google Scholar
• Ghent, 11 March 1992, T.Gez./Rev. Dr. Santé, 1995-1996, 60 with footnote from Vansweevelt, Th.; see also Liège, 23 April 1980, R.J.A.R., 10351 with footnote from Dalcq, R.O.
   Google Scholar
• See Rb. Antwerp, 13 May 1993, T.Gez./Rev. Dr. Santé, …, 192, with footnote from Colette.
   Google Scholar
• See Dalcq, R.O., note under Liège, 23 April april 1980, R.J.A.R., 1981, 10351 (check: Rb. Brussels, 5 May 1995).
   Google Scholar
• See Vansweevelt, Th., 353.
   Google Scholar
• See before this Vansweevelt, Th., l.c., 355.
   Google Scholar
• See Vansweevelt, Th.
   Google Scholar
• This therapeutic exception can only be invoked in cases where the medical care is urgent and in cases where the therapeutic benefit of the operation is high. The justification for the therapeutic exception will be found in the legal character of the emergency situation (Vansweevelt. Th., 370); see also Ghent, 11 March 1992, T.Gez./Rev. Dr. Snanté, 1995-1996, 59, with footnote from Vansweevelt, Th.: The therapeutic exception to which the doctor appeals to support tris argument, holds good only in that a doctor’s information may be withheld when it is in the interests of the patient, namely when the provision of information would so upset the patient or make him so afraid, that he would no longer be in a stase to make a decision, (check Liège, 27 november 1971, J.T., 1974, 297).
   Google Scholar
• See also article 10.2 Verdrag Biogeneeskunde.
   Google Scholar
• See Verdrag Biogeneeskunde, commentary no 68-70.
   Google Scholar
• See Vansweevelt, Th., “Recente ontwikkelingen en twistpunten m.b.t. de medische aansprakelijkheidsverzekering”, T.Gez./Rev. Dr. Santé, 1995-1996, 200.
   Google Scholar