Picking up on Natalie’s last post regarding informed consent when it comes to RU-486, here’s the latest from our Supreme Court on that legal concept:
Ediger thus reinforces an obligation of the medical community to practise within such standards of care that are responsive to the risks that treatments carry and for which informed consent is sought. It reinforces a common-sense and intuitive notion that a patient needs to be advised not only on the risks of a proposed procedure, but also on the consequences if such risks were to materialize…
The court concluded that simply conveying the statistical probability of the risk to the patient is not in itself sufficient to meet the standard of care with respect to disclosure — the patient must be advised of not only the risk, but also of the consequences if the risk is to materialize.
Seems like a high standard to me. Think it will be met it if RU-486 is permitted in Canada?
by 
Leave a Reply