From informed consent to patient choice: a new protected interest

Journal of law and health

Gesnerus, 2000

In response to cases of high handed medical interventions and treatments, a debate on the legal justification of operations and the relevance of patients’ consent developed among German-speaking jurists in the 1890s. The view that surgery was objectively physical injury or battery, which went merely unpunished through the patient’s consent, was highly contested among legal experts and firmly rejected by doctors. Various proposals to justify indicated medical treatment without consent were discussed. German jurisdiction, however, endorsed the battery theory of medical interventions and thus prepared the way for the concept of informed consent in medicine.

2009

Medical Law Review, 2016

Maryland Law Review, 1998

Battery is a promising cause of action for toxic tort plaintiffs. Nevertheless, there remains substantial controversy as to whether battery can only be applied in the case of direct interferences. Building on the principles of corrective justice, this article undertakes a critical exploration of the directness element in the tort of battery. The analysis begins by considering how the directness ought to be treated where the battery committed occurred via an environmental vector, such as wind or water. Then, using a series of thought experiments, the article ultimately argues that Canadian law should abolish the distinction between direct and indirect acts in battery in response to pragmatic and doctrinal considerations.

BUL Rev., 1987

Journal of Medical Ethics, 2004