Why did the doctor ask me to sign so many words?

Recently, I saw such a [help] on the Internet:

Before he was ill and hospitalized, he is now required to be discharged from the hospital, but the doctor is required to stay in the hospital for observation. He must sign if he is discharged from the hospital and say that he will bear the consequences. May I ask everyone, is it legal for the hospital to do so?

I believe everyone will have some such doubts or suspicions more or less, such as:

    Why did the doctor ask me to sign so many words? Why do you want to tell me the worst when signing? Can we clear the responsibility after signing?

If there are so many questions, the patients will not be able to treat the disease at ease.

This time Dr. Clove will tell everyone that signing really means what.

Patients’ Right to Know and Doctors’ Obligation to Inform

From the perspective of patients, patients have the right to informed consent.

China’s laws clearly stipulate that patients have the right to know and understand their diseases, including examination, diagnosis, treatment and other aspects.

From the doctor’s point of view, doctors have the obligation to inform.

Doctors have the obligation and responsibility to tell the clients (patients) of the current diagnosis and treatment plan, and to make true and accurate answers to professional medical problems in easy-to-understand words.

Therefore, the patient’s [knowledge] and the doctor’s [notification] cooperate with each other. In order to ensure the implementation of this process, written records are needed to record the performance of rights and obligations. Only in this way can the patient’s rights be protected and the hospital’s supervision of the doctor’s work be facilitated.

In addition, signing is also a process that makes everyone psychologically prepared. Disease changes are difficult to predict, but sometimes we can see the latest developments of the disease, even if it develops in a bad direction, we can also understand the antecedents and consequences. Therefore, the purpose of signing is not only to inform, but also to hope that patients can be treated positively, seriously and optimistically as far as possible.

Patient’s decision-making power

On the basis of knowledge and notification, doctors have already told everyone the progress of the disease and the advantages and disadvantages of treatment in easy-to-understand words, but the law still stipulates:

The patient has the right to participate in all decisions concerning his medical plan. Except as otherwise provided by laws and regulations, no treatment will be carried out without the patient’s voluntary and consent. Such consent shall be submitted to the patient in writing and signed by the patient or his relatives.

Is this what what means? In short, although doctors have told us all the interests, the final decision is in our own hands.

After all, the object of treatment is one’s own body. Doctors have told us the advantages and disadvantages of therapy and drugs, and we must make our own decisions.

This is the right that patients should enjoy and the law that doctors must abide by.

In short, patients should be informed when treating diseases.

Informed Consent ≠ Disclaimer

Let the patient know, let the patient decide, then what will happen in the end? Does the doctor not have to be responsible if he signs it?

In fact, this idea is totally overly worrying, because signing is only an administrative system and does not mean disclaimer.

Generally speaking, [signing] is to ensure that there is no problem in the handling procedures. However, whether the handling of this matter, that is, the process of curing diseases, is correct or not, has nothing to do with signing.

Doctors are the plan makers with professional knowledge and patients are the adopters. Therefore, if the treatment plan is wrong from a medical point of view, then even if it is signed, patients are not responsible.

With written records and signature verification, in case of conflicts, it will not be difficult to sort out the situation because of the patient’s [I don’t know] [no one told me] [if I had known this would happen, I wouldn’t have…], nor will it be difficult to sort out the situation because of the doctor’s [I thought he knew] [he didn’t ask me] [I said everything possible] and so on.

So, who will judge whether the doctor is right or not?

At this time, lawyers, courts and hospital leaders all have the final say. Only the [Medical Accident Technical Appraisal Committee] has the power to judge. Appraisal is an extremely professional process, so it will not be discussed here.

In short, informed consent ≠ disclaimer, and signing is not a sign of [life and death]. It only ensures that the doctor has made it clear and discussed with you. However, if there is something wrong with what the doctor said, or if the patient still makes trouble without reason after knowing the situation and signing, then no one can escape the legal sanction in the end.

Who can sign on his behalf except himself?

After understanding the above knowledge, you can sign with confidence.

However, if the patient himself is unable to sign, who can sign on his behalf?

The current < < Case Writing Standard > > stipulates that there are the following types of personnel who have the right to express the informed consent and signatures of hospitalized patients:

    Patients; Legal representative; Close relatives; Affiliates.

The first three definitions are relatively clear. For example, the legal representative of a minor is his guardian, but the definition of [related party] is relatively broad. It is generally believed that neighborhood committee cadres, police and third parties entrusted by relatives can all be regarded as [related party].

Having said so much, returning to the first example, the doctor is actually fulfilling the obligation of [informing] when he requires the patient to sign before leaving the hospital. The patient can decide for himself, but in the end he must have a written record.

[Consequences at your own risk] is actually to fulfill the patient’s [right to know] and [right to choose], refuse the doctor’s treatment plan (stay in hospital for observation), and bear the relevant risks. Doctors do not provide medical procedures, so naturally they do not have to bear the follow-up responsibilities.

So, what should I do if I suspect that the doctor’s [stay in hospital for observation] is redundant?

First of all, of course, it is to fully communicate with doctors. After fully understanding, there are two choices:

    The first is to sign off and take risks on your own. The second is to accept the plan (stay in hospital for observation). After the plan is completed or terminated by yourself, you will make complaints or lawsuits to safeguard your legitimate rights and interests through correct channels.

Medicine is enigmatic, diseases change a lot, coupled with the complexity of individuals, no doctor can guarantee to cure the disease, but doctors and patients are a community of interests, doctors will certainly use the best known methods to treat. If the signing of this matter is too tangled, it is not conducive to the recovery of the disease.

No profession can operate normally without trust, especially medical treatment.

If you want everyone to have a cure for his illness, you may as well spend a little time, know more and trust more. A healthy doctor-patient relationship starts with you and me.