"If you think you've got a lump, they'll screen you." Informed consent, health promotion, and breast cancer
Journal of Medical Ethics 30 (2):227-230 (2004)
A great deal has been written about information that is or should be provided when seeking consent to medical research and treatment. Relatively little attention has been paid to information describing health promotion interventions. This paper critically examines some information material describing three different methods of encouraging early presentation of breast cancer in the UK: the NHS breast screening programme, breast self examination, and breast awareness. Findings from a content analysis of printed material and a series of focus group discussions that included women who speak little or no English were organised around the Department of Health’s recommendations about the information which should be provided when seeking consent to treatment and research. They exposed inconsistencies, ambiguities, and gaps, which when taken together suggest both compliance and non-compliance are being achieved in the absence of informed consent. The findings also provide a starting point for a discussion about how informed consent to health promotion might be sought.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
The Patient/Client/Consumer/Service User and Medical Ethics 40 Years On.J. Neuberger - 2015 - Journal of Medical Ethics 41 (1):22-24.
Similar books and articles
God, Disease, and Spiritual Dilemmas: Reading the Lives of Women with Breast Cancer.Megan Eide & Ann Milliken Pederson - 2009 - Zygon 44 (1):85-96.
Beauty and Breast Implantation: How Candidate Selection Affects Autonomy and Informed Consent.Lisa S. Parker - 1995 - Hypatia 10 (1):183 - 201.
Working for the Cure: Challenging Pink Ribbon Activism [Book Chapter].Maya J. Goldenberg - 2010 - In Roma Harris, Nadine Wathen & Sally Wyatt (eds.), [Book] Configuring Health Consumers: Health Work and the Imperative of Personal Responsibility. Eds. R. Harris, N. Wathen, S. Wyatt. Amsterdam: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010. Palgrave-Macmillan.
Organ Procurement Organizations Internet Enrollment for Organ Donation: Abandoning Informed Consent. [REVIEW]Sandra Woien, Mohamad Rady, Joseph Verheijde & Joan McGregor - 2006 - BMC Medical Ethics 7 (14):1-9.
Informed Consent: A Primer for Clinical Practice.Deborah Bowman - 2011 - Cambridge University Press.
Hide-and-Seek or Show-and-Tell? Emerging Issues of Informed Consent.Leonard J. Haas - 1991 - Ethics and Behavior 1 (3):175 – 189.
Banning All Drug Promotion is the Best Option Pending Major Reforms.Peter R. Mansfield - 2005 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 2 (2):75-81.
Issues of Consent and Feedback in a Genetic Epidemiological Study of Women with Breast Cancer.M. P. M. Richards - 2003 - Journal of Medical Ethics 29 (2):93-96.
Uninformed Consent: Mass Screening for Prostate Cancer.Stewart Justman - 2012 - Bioethics 26 (3):143-148.
“It is About Our Body, Our Own Body!”: On the Difficulty of Telling Dutch Women Under 50 That Mammography is Not for Them.Peter J. Schulz & Bert Meuffels - 2012 - Journal of Argumentation in Context 1 (1):130-142.
Informed Consent Revisited: Japan and the U.S.Akira Akabayashi & Brian Taylor Slingsby - 2006 - American Journal of Bioethics 6 (1):9 – 14.
Effectively Obtaining Informed Consent for Child and Adolescent Participation in Mental Health Research.Benedetto Vitiello - 2008 - Ethics and Behavior 18 (2 & 3):182 – 198.
The Medical Decision-Making Process and the Family: The Case of Breast Cancer Patients and Their Husbands.Roy Gilbar & Ora Gilbar - 2009 - Bioethics 23 (3):183-192.
Added to index2010-08-24
Total downloads16 ( #285,226 of 2,132,887 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #237,575 of 2,132,887 )
How can I increase my downloads?
There are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.