Medical Malpractice Consultants

DUTY OF DISCLOSURE AND PATIENT’S INFORMED REFUSAL: RISKS OF NEGLIGENCE IN COVID VACCINES

Healthcare professionals providing treatment to a patient have a duty to disclose all material and relevant information in respect of the proposed treatment that the patient has to undergo. The duty to disclose covers risks that are material, special and unusual. The likelihood of the risk occurring and the gravity of the risks are key determinants on whether the healthcare professional ought to have disclosed such information to the patient to allow the patient to exercise informed consent. When a risk is remote, or simply a mere possibility, there is no duty to disclose, however be that as it may, when the same remote risk is of severe consequence the healthcare professional has a duty to disclose such information to the patient.

The Covid jabs carry a limited risk of death in certain individuals predisposed to an adverse reaction to the vaccine. Normally the vaccinating centres may be unable to vet the patient suitability to be vaccinated. However, the very problem increases the risks to patients to an adverse reaction and that imposes an unequivocal responsibility on the government to inform the patient of the risks associated with the vaccine. The failure to do so would amount to a failure to disclose material information to the patient and thereby precluded such patient to exercise informed consent. The fact that the risk of death occurring from a Covid jab is not being disclosed is a material omission on the part of the healthcare professionals and government. When a patient undertakes any form of medication they are always told of possible adverse reactions, why the government chooses to play footsy with the Covid jabs is unknown. The failure to disclose the risks associated with the Covid vaccine, will often be a direct causal link to the injury or death suffered by the patient who would not have otherwise been injured if not for the vaccine.

The patient has a right to refuse treatment if in he is not comfortable with the risks associated with the treatment. Informed consent is there to protect the individual’s right his own bodily integrity and right to choose which medical treatment they want and are in line with their own values and irrespective of how foolish they may appear to others. And of course there are issues of limitations on this because it is a communicable disease but the process of addressing that part is not being followed by the government.

The matter is not only an ethical issue, it is a political one, the fact that the everyone is joining the bandwagon of vaccines does not absolve the government the responsibility to properly exercise transparency with these jabs. If science supports the use of vaccines, well and good but the secrecy and outright denial of risks associated with these vaccines is counter-productive, it feeds the paranoia in some circles and sponsors scaremongering conspiracy theorists. This attitude is repugnant to principles of good governance.

A client of ours was given medication for high blood pressure when in fact he had low blood pressure. One day after taking medication, he fainted and was injured as a result. We are helping him.

Government and Private Healthcare providers remain liable for their failure to supervise the provision of healthcare in their facilities by failing to employ qualified and competent staff to treat patients. Haeba u lemetse ka lebaka la bafani ba ts'ebeletso tsa bophelo, u na le tokelo ea ho tseka.

Provision of healthcare is a critical part of your daily life, you seek the services of a healthcare professional normally when you are not at your best, usually in pain, discomfort and sometimes with the possibility of death. You need to know that when things go wrong, there is someone who is ready to defend your interests. #