The Importance of Dialogue Between Patient and Practitioner in Medico-Legal Cases

The landmark UK legal case that addressed the importance of dialogue between patients and doctors was Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] UKSC 11. This case fundamentally changed the standard for informed consent in the UK.

Key Details of the Case:

• Facts: Nadine Montgomery, a diabetic woman of small stature, was not informed by her doctor about the 9–10% risk of shoulder dystocia during vaginal delivery. Her son was born with severe disabilities due to complications during birth. She argued that if she had been informed of the risk, she would have opted for a caesarean section.

• Issue: The case revolved around whether the doctor had a duty to inform the patient of material risks and reasonable alternatives to the proposed treatment.

• Judgment: The Supreme Court ruled in favour of Mrs. Montgomery, stating that patients have the right to be informed of material risks that would be significant to them personally, rather than what the medical professional deems important.

The Judge:

The leading judgment in the Supreme Court was delivered by Lady Hale and Lord Kerr. They emphasised that the law requires doctors to engage in a meaningful dialogue with patients, ensuring they understand the material risks and can make informed decisions about their care.

This case highlighted the shift from a paternalistic model of care to one that respects patient autonomy, ensuring that communication is central to the doctor-patient relationship.