In some cases, some patients may require to remove some of their body parts in order to save their life. For example, cancer patients often forced to remove their body parts like leg, hand etc in order to prevent the spreading of cancer across the body and to save their life. In such cases, the patient can decide whether to undergo such treatment or not as some people may not like to sustain their life without some of their body parts. Before removing any body parts, the doctors should take consent from the patient which is known as informed consent. This paper analyses the legal aspects involved in informed consent by analyzing the given case study of Mrs. Sparza, a 70 year old grandmother with little English skills, who is scheduled for surgery of her right eye.
According to the existing American laws with respect to informed consent, patients who are competent enough to take medical decisions have the legal and moral right to refuse or accept any or all treatment even if the decision might result in serious disability or even death (WebMD, 2010). In Mrs. Sparza’s case, upon the entry to the hospital, she and her son review the general admission documents and Mrs. Sparza signs them all. Moreover, she also completed and executed a durable power of attorney for health care and her daughter and son as her agents for decision making in the event that she became incapacitated. She also specified that she did not wish any heroic measures and that in the event she went into a coma she wanted the life support terminated. In short, she was competent enough to take decisions about her future when she was admitted in the hospital. Mrs. Sparza visited the hospital with the intention of undergoing surgery only on her right eye. But after examination, the doctors informed her that she needs surgery on both the eyes. Realizing her poor knowledge in English, the doctor explained her, the necessity of