3 ms·

Really dumb question, but can't the doctor just ignore your conscious informed denial of consent for nutrition? I had a cop completely fabricate a story I had

Really dumb question, but can't the doctor just ignore your conscious informed denial of consent for nutrition? I had a cop completely fabricate a story I had ingested a bunch of drugs and he dragged me to the hospital in cuffs. I was stone cold sober and they documented I was fully alert and oriented and had denied consent, but I got cussed out by a nurse for denying consent and then she started touching and performing medical care on me anyway. I complained to the state board and my complaint was summarily denied on the basis the nurse can do whatever she likes as medical care providers actually do not have any legal duty to respect consent of patients, even when there is no court order. I really walked away with that with the conclusion you have precious little choice over your medical care, and your care providers will do whatever they like and you have little choice even to deny it.

istjohn 4y ago
Interesting. This article corroborates what you're saying: > Because healthcare providers have not respected patient rights to autonomy and bodily integrity and courts have not vindicated violations of these rights, legislative change is necessary[1]. I know someone whose young child was vaccinated against their parents' will at a public school. Lawyers told them they didn't have any recourse unless they could show some harm was done. I'm pro-vaccine, but the idea that my child could come home from school one day having had a medical procedure performed on them without my knowledge or consent is disturbing. 1. https://elibrary.law.psu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1450&context=fac_works https://elibrary.law.psu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=145...
justsomehnguy 4y ago
I read this story here already, but posted definitely not under this alias. As to your question: There are legal... nuances everywhere. The most important is what the subject should be, in the eyes of the law, sane. The second one, for US, is what the doc/clinic shouldn't be targetable for the absence of care lawsuit. The third one is what if the state recognizes DNR requests. Overall, force feeding is the tool of psychiatric clinics and oppressive, tyrannic governments. Sometimes the former is needed, eg there is a manic episode but overall the person is quite stable and have a high chance of recovery. The latter...

istjohn 4y ago

Interesting. This article corroborates what you're saying: > Because healthcare providers have not respected patient rights to autonomy and bodily integrity and courts have not vindicated violations of these rights, legislative change is necessary[1]. I know someone whose young child was vaccinated against their parents' will at a public school. Lawyers told them they didn't have any recourse unless they could show some harm was done. I'm pro-vaccine, but the idea that my child could come home from school one day having had a medical procedure performed on them without my knowledge or consent is disturbing. 1. https://elibrary.law.psu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1450&context=fac_works https://elibrary.law.psu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=145...

justsomehnguy 4y ago

I read this story here already, but posted definitely not under this alias. As to your question: There are legal... nuances everywhere. The most important is what the subject should be, in the eyes of the law, sane. The second one, for US, is what the doc/clinic shouldn't be targetable for the absence of care lawsuit. The third one is what if the state recognizes DNR requests. Overall, force feeding is the tool of psychiatric clinics and oppressive, tyrannic governments. Sometimes the former is needed, eg there is a manic episode but overall the person is quite stable and have a high chance of recovery. The latter...