Montgomery ruling
Last edited 06/2019
The Montgomery case in 2015 was a landmark for informed consent in the UK
- Nadine Montgomery, a diabetic woman and of small stature, delivered her
son vaginally; her son experienced complications owing to shoulder dystocia,
resulting in hypoxic insult with consequent cerebral palsy
- her obstetrician had not disclosed the increased risk of this complication in vaginal delivery, despite Montgomery asking if the baby's size was a potential problem
- Montgomery sued for negligence, arguing that, if she had known of the increased risk, she would have requested a caesarean section
- the Supreme Court of the UK announced judgment in her favour in March
2015
- it established that, rather than being a matter for clinical judgment
to be assessed by professional medical opinion, a patient should be
told whatever they want to know, not what the doctor thinks they should
be told
- it established that, rather than being a matter for clinical judgment
to be assessed by professional medical opinion, a patient should be
told whatever they want to know, not what the doctor thinks they should
be told
- this ruling means that patients can expect a more active and informed role in treatment decisions, with a corresponding shift in emphasis on various values, including autonomy, in medical ethics
Reference:
- Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] SC 11 [2015] 1 AC 1430.