This Article  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Arch Otolaryngol. 1967;86(5):587.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

A surgeon, called in to operate on a minor, examined the hospital records just prior to the operative procedure and discovered that only the mother had given consent to the operation. The father was present but had not signed the consent. Upon questioning he finally admitted he had withheld his signature so that if the operation were not a success he could sue the doctor. The surgeon advised the father that he thought more of the possibilities of an award for damages than of his child's welfare, and that he would not operate without his signed consent.

This case illustrates the "litigation-mindedness" of some of the public today, and the traditional role of the father who at one time alone could authorize treatment of a child. Today, however, exclusive guardianship powers in the father are a dead letter in the law; instead parents share the authority to consent to medical . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?