Selected highlights from draft GMC consent guidance Part 2

[holyshedballs]

"Where a patient is able to make a decision and give or withhold their consent. In most cases, patients make decisions after considering the advice and information they have been given.

They choose between the different options and if they decide to go ahead with an intervention, they express their consent to the doctor or a member of the care team."

A good idea but this depends on the doctor being up to date and providing all information, including information they may not necessarily agree with. The guidance goes on to say:

"You must give balanced information to patients about their options, including the option of doing nothing. If you recommend a course of action, you should explain your reasons for doing so. You should be aware of how your own wishes or preferences might influence the advice you give and you must not put pressure on a patient to accept your advice."

in my view, this means that a doctor should be informed of the alternative diagnosis and treatment of hypothyroidism in order to provide balanced information to patients about their options.

Importantly, a doctor should not let his or her wishes or preferences influence the advice they give to patients. I take this to mean that they should not be biased or prejudiced. in our case, doctors should take into account our "alternative" method for treating thyoid matters. The GMC has acknowledged "our" method as supported by a responsible body of medical opinon, so doctors SHOULD be aware of it.

This is really important.

So what do patients do if they think the doctor hasn't provided balanced information?

Draft paragraph 9 states:

"When making decisions about health and care it is important to give weight to the patient’s wishes and knowledge of their own condition as well as your expertise and clinical knowledge. "

So a doctor should give weight to your knowledge of your condition. The Supreme Court told the medical profession that patients are not empty vessels, they very often have good knowledge of their condition thanks to the internet and patient support groups.

[serenfach]

The problem with most GPs in providing balanced information is their ignorance, and their inability to listen when you do give them up to date research or information. Sometimes the information is quite simple, such as a person with hypothyroidism can have raised cholestorol levels, and these will fall when the hypothyroidism is under control, and not just give them a prescription for statins. Or you have hashi's, here have some anti-depressants. Or not doing the T3 in a blood test when research has shown this is vital.

I have not found many GPs who are open to their patients knowledge!

[holyshedballs in reply to serenfach]

That is where the guidance comes in

I think that the GMC recognises what the Supreme Court said regarding patients who know about their condition

If a doctor refuses information given by a patient then that doctor is not complying with the guidance

It is then up to the patient to take matters further

That is what the guidance is there for

It’s benchmark to measure the doctor against and to take corrective action if the doctor fails to comply with the guidance

What that action us depends on the doctor

It may be that a strongly worded letter to the doctor is sufficient

It may need bumping up to the CCG

Or finally to the GMC if all else fails