The article discusses the legal institution of patient autonomy in Ukrainian law from the side of a historical and comparative perspective. Being of twofold nature, patient autonomy encompasses both the patient’s right to undergo treatment, surgery and other medical interventions explicitly with a free and informed consent, as well as the patient’s right to forego medical treatment (informed refusal) without being obliged to state a justified reason for it. Albeit Ukrainian legislation is clear in relation to the provision of consent for treatment – both normatively and documentarily, the institute of informed refusal needs certain upgrade, especially in the view of the existing case law. The author also discusses a handful of relevant judgments of the European Court of Human Rights on the subjects, as well as the historical vaults of informed consent and informed refusal, being case law from different states of the world, encompassing the European Union, England, the United States of America, Canada, and Japan. The author hallmarks the necessity of the patients not only to know their respective rights, but also to be able to protect them, which is expressed in the enrichment of the legal culture of the patients. Apart from the above-mentioned statements, the author makes a statement that medical malpractice lawsuits in Ukrainian courts have become far more frequent than they used to be a decade ago.
Legal acts
Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, Oviedo, 4.IV.1997, European Treaty Series – No. 164.
Instruktsiia shchodo zapovnennia formy pervynnoi oblikovoi dokumentatsii № 002-1/o «Napravlennia na hospitalizatsiiu vahitnoi zhinky dlia provedennia operatsii (protsedury) shtuchnoho pereryvannia nebazhanoi vahitnosti, strok yakoi stanovyt vid 12 do 22 tyzhniv». Zatverdzheno Nakazom Ministerstva okhorony zdorovia Ukrainy 24.05.2013 № 423.
Law of Ukrainian Tsentralna Rada “On exclusive right of the Tsentralna Rada to promulgate the legislative acts of the U.P.R.” (Ukr.: «Zakon pro vyključne pravo Central’noji Rady vydavaty zakonodavči akty UNR»). Ukrajins’ka Central’na Rada. Dokumenty i materialy. U dvoch tomach. Tom I (4 bereznja – 9 hrudnja 1917 r.). Kyjiv: Naukova dumka, 1996. № 224, p. 477–478.
Nakaz Ministerstva Okhorony Zdorovia Ukrainy vid 14 liutoho 2012 roku № 110 «Pro zatverdzhennia form pervynnoi oblikovoi dokumentatsii ta instruktsii shchodo yikh zapovnennia, shcho vykorystovuiutsia v zakladakh okhorony zdorovia nezalezhno vid formy vlasnosti i pidporiadkuvannia».
Nakaz Ministerstva Okhorony Zdorovia Ukrainy vid 9 hrudnia 2020 roku № 2387 «Pro vnesennia zmin do formy pervynnoi oblikovoi dokumentatsii № 003-6/o ta Instruktsii shchodo yii zapovnennia».
Nakaz Ministerstva Okhorony Zdorovia Ukrainy vid 23.09.2009 № 690 «Pro zatverdzhennia Poriadku provedennia klinichnykh vyprobuvan likarskykh zasobiv ta ekspertyzy materialiv klinichnykh vyprobuvan i Typovoho polozhennia pro komisii z pytan etyky».
Rozporządzenie Prezydenta Rzeczypospolitej z dnia 25 września 1932 r. o wykonywaniu praktyki lekarskiej. Dz.U. 1932. Nr 81. Poz. 712. Dziennik Ustaw. Nr. 81 (1932). Poziom Nr. 712. S. 1517–1520.
Strafgesetz (Österreich), 01.09.1852, R.G.Bl. Nr. 117.
ZHVANKO, Lyubov (2016). Hetmanat Pavla Skoropadskoho (kviten – hruden 1918 r.), osnovy derzhavnoi polityky u sferi okhorony zdorovia ta sotsialnoho zakhystu naselennia, Chastyna II (17.06.2016).
Special legal literature
BOUCARD, C.-V. (1860). Inoculation d’accidents secondaires syphilitiques: [affaire de l’Hospice de l’Antiquaille]. Lyon.
Glos Prawa, Nr. 7–8, 06.1934, str. 518.
HIGUCHI, Norio (1992). The Patient’s Right to Know of a Cancer Diagnosis: A Comparison of Japanese Paternalism and American Self-Determination, Washburn Law Journal, 31, 455–473.
LEFLAR, Robert B. (1997). Informed Consent and Patient’s Rights in Japan, Houston Law Review, 33, 1–112.
LYTVYNENKO, Anatoliy A. (2021). Pravova kharakterystyka «zapovitu patsiienta»: doktryna i sudova praktyka. Medicne pravo, 1(27), 52–68.
LYTVYNENKO, Anatoliy A. (2021). Protecting Patient’s Rights in a Post-Traditional Legal System: Comparing Latvian and Japanese Medical Jurisprudence. Medicne Pravo, 2 (28), 18–46 [online]. https://doi.org/10.25040/medicallaw2021.02.018
LYTVYNENKO, Anatoliy A. (2021). The Rise of the French Doctrine of Informed Consent: Criminal Responsibility for an Unauthorised Medical Experiment – The Case of the Antiquaille Hospital and Subsequent Notable Judgments. Athens Journal of Law, 7 (4), 603–616 [online]. https://doi.org/10.30958/ajl.7-4-10
LYTVYNENKO, Anatoliy A. (2021). Unauthorized medical intervention and informed consent in the common law of Canada prior to the Supreme Court’s decision of Reibl v. Hughes (1899–1980). Chasopis Kijivskoho Universytetu Prava, 2020/4, 260–282 [online]. https://doi.org/10.36695/2219-5521.4.2020.47
LYTVYNENKO, Anatoliy A. (2022). Praktyka Okruzhnoho ta Apeliatsiinykh sudiv Lvova u spravakh shchodo nedbalosti medychnykh pratsivnykiv protiahom 1919–1939 rokiv. Medicne pravo, 2(30), 49–63 [online]. https://doi.org/10.25040/medicallaw2022.02.049
ROBERTSON, Gerald B. (1984). Informed Consent in Canada: An Empirical Study, Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 22(1), 139–161 [online]. https://doi.org/10.60082/2817-5069.1947
URKEVICH, Tatjana & LYTVYNENKO, Anatoliy A. (2022). The Doctrine of Patient’s Informed Consent in the Legislation and Jurisprudence of Czech Republic, Austria and the Latvian Republic. Medicne Pravo, 1(29), 49–94 [online]. https://doi.org/10.25040/medicallaw2022.01.049
Case law
Bundesgerichtshof, Urteil vom 3 Juli 1984 – 3 StR 96/84, BGHSt. 32, 267.
Bolam v. Friern Hospital Management Committee, [1957] 1 W.L.R. 582 [1956 B. No. 507], 20.02, 21.02, 22.02, 25.02, 26.02.1957.
Bundesgerichtshof (Deutschland), Urteil vom 10.07.1954 – VI ZR 45/54.
Caron c. Gagnon, Cour Supérieure du Québec, 68 S.C. 155, 1930 CarswellQue 184., 1930.
Canterbury v. Spence, 464 F. 2d 772 (D.C. Cir. 1972), No. 22099, 19.05.1972.
Chatterton v. Gerson et al., [1981] 1 Q.B. 432 [1976 C. No. 1138], 21.01, 22.01, 23.01, 24.01, 25.01, 31.01.1980.
Corte Suprema di Cassazione (Italia), Sezione I Civila, Sentenza del 27148, 16 ottobre 2007.
Corte Suprema di Cassazione (Italia), Sezione unite Civili, Sentenza del 27145, 11 novembre 2008.
Cour d’Appel de Bruxelles (Belge), 11 janvier 1962, Pasicrisie 1963 II, 23–25.
Cour de Cassation (France), 31 octobre 1933, Recueil Sirey, 1934 I., 11.
Csoma v. Romania, European Court of Human Rights, Judgment of 15 January 2013, App. No. 8759/05.
Dufresne c. X., Cour Supérieure du Québec, [1961] C.S. 119, 1960 CarswellQue 129, 1960.
Ellis v. Wallsend District Hospital (1989) 17 N.S.W.L.R. 553, 31.05, 01.06, 19.10.1989.
Hooge Raad (Strafkamer) (Nederlands), 2 Maart 1936, Weekblad van het Regt/Nederlandse Jurisprudentie 1936, Nr. 352, p. 2–3.
Hopp v. Lepp (Supreme Court of Canada), [1980] 2 S.C.R. 192, 20.05.1980.
Jehovah’s Witnesses of the State of Washington D.C. v. King County Hospital et. al.,278 F. Supp. 488 (1967), Civ. No. 6595, 08.06.1967.
John F. Kennedy Memorial Hospital v. Heston, 59 N.J. 576; 279 A.2d 670 (1971), 13.07.1971.
K.K. Oberster Gerichts- und Cassationshof, Entscheidung vom 20 April 1904, Nr. 5721, EOG Ziv. S. Bd. 41 (Neue Folge, Bd. 7), Nr. 2672, S. 250–251.
K.K. Oberster Gerichtshof, Entsch. vom 4. Januara 1906, Ziffer 18553 ex 1905, Glaser/Unger (begründet), Pfaff, Schey & Krupský (fortgeseβt), Bd. 45, Nr. 4449, S. 820–822, Zentralblatt für juridische Praxis, Bd. 26, S. 816–817, Entsch. Nr. 276.
K.K. Obersten Gerichtshof, Entsch. vom 7. September 1915, Rv I 448/15, Glaser/Unger (begründet), Schey/Štěpán (fortgeseβt). Bd. 52, Nr. 7557, S. 844–848.
Kenny v. Lockwood, [1932] O.R. 141, [1932] 1 D.L.R. 507, 01.12.1931.
Lambert v France, European Court of Human Rights, Judgment of 5 June 2015, App. No. 46043/14, [2015] ECHR 545.
Malette v. Shulman (Ont. C.A.), 72 O.R. (2d) 417; [1990] O.J. No. 450, 30.03.1990.
Marshall v. Curry, [1933] 3 D.L.R. 260, 15.05.1933.
Min. Publ. c. Guyenot et Gailleton, Trib. corr. de Lyon, 15 dec. 1859, Dalloz Periodique 1859 III., 87, 87–88.
Mohr v. Williams, 95 Minn. 261, 104 N.W. 12 (Minn. 1905), 23.06.1905.
Oberster Gerichtshof (Österreich), 2012.08.10. 9 Ob 68 / 11g.
Parmley v. Parmley, [1945] S.C.R. 635, 20.06.1945.
Parnell v. Springle, 5 Rev. du Jur. 74 (1899), 20.01.1899.
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu (Ukraina) v skladi kolehii suddiv Druhoi sudovoi palaty Kasatsiinoho tsyvilnoho sudu vid 14 bereznia 2018 roku u spravi № 537/4429/15-ц, provadzhennia № 61-4449sv18.
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu (Ukraina) v skladi kolehii suddiv Druhoi sudovoi palaty Kasatsiinoho tsyvilnoho sudu vid 15 lystopada 2018 roku u spravi № 761/24076/15-ts, provadzhennia № 61-26051sv18.
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu (Ukraina) v skladi kolehii suddiv Druhoi sudovoi palaty Kasatsiinoho tsyvilnoho sudu vid 05 hrudnia 2018 roku u spravi № 188/2994/15-ts, provadzhennia № 64-44011sv18.
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu (Ukraina) v skladi kolehii suddiv Pershoi sudovoi palaty Kasatsiinoho tsyvilnoho sudu vid 27 liutoho 2019 roku u spravi № 755/2545/15-ts, provadzhennia № 61-47866sv18.
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu (Ukraina) v skladi kolehii suddiv Druhoi sudovoi palaty Kasatsiinoho tsyvilnoho sudu vid 25 lystopada 2019 roku u spravi № 264/7310/15-ts, provadzhennia № 61-32917sv18.
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu (Ukraina) v skladi kolehii suddiv Pershoi sudovoi palaty Kasatsiinoho tsyvilnoho sudu vid 27 lystopada 2019 roku u spravi № 661/2894/16-ts, provadzhennia № 61-18365sv18.
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu (Ukraina) v skladi kolehii suddiv Tretoi sudovoi palaty Kasatsiinoho Tsyvilnoho Sudu vid 04 hrudnia 2019 roku u spravi № 760/8719/17, provadzhennia № 61-9359sv19.
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu (Ukraina) v skladi kolehii suddiv Pershoi sudovoi palaty Kasatsiinoho tsyvilnoho sudu vid 04 lystopada 2020 roku u spravi № 686/6022/18, provadzhennia № 61-22818sv19.
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu (Ukraina) v skladi kolehii suddiv Pershoi sudovoi palaty Kasatsiinoho Tsyvilnoho Sudu vid 11 lystopada 2020 roku u spravi № 442/4791/17, provadzhennia № 61-37882sv18.
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu (Ukraina) v skladi kolehii suddiv Druhoi sudovoi palaty Kasatsiinoho Tsyvilnoho Sudu vid 10 liutoho 2021 roku u spravi № 235/6366/18, provadzhennia № 61-13388sv19.
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu (Ukraina) v skladi kolehii suddiv Pershoi sudovoi palaty Kasatsiinoho Kryminalnoho Sudu vid 21 kvitnya 2021 roku u spravi № 712/12532/14-k, provadzhennia № 51-6099km20.
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu (Ukraina) v skladi kolehii suddiv Pershoi sudovoi palaty Kasatsiinoho Tsyvilnoho Sudu vid 21 lypnia 2021 roku u spravi № 572/3616/19, provadzhennia № 61-13844sv20.
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu (Ukraina) v skladi kolehii suddiv Pershoi sudovoi palaty Kasatsiinoho tsyvilnoho sudu vid 19 sichnia 2022 roku u spravi № 308/4164/15-ts, provadzhennia № 61-850sv21.
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu (Ukraina) v skladi kolehii suddiv Pershoi sudovoi palaty Kasatsiinoho tsyvilnoho sudu vid 09 liutoho 2022 roku u spravi № 161/7881/20, provadzhennia № 61-11435sv21.
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu (Ukraina) v skladi kolehii suddiv ?? sudovoi palaty Kasatsiinoho Kryminalnoho Sudu vid 21 chervnia 2022 roku u spravi № 744/315/16-k, provadzhennia № 51-5915km21.
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu (Ukraina) v skladi kolehii suddiv Pershoi sudovoi palaty Kasatsiinoho Tsyvilnoho Sudu vid 29 chervnia 2022 roku u spravi № 205/9115/19, provadzhennia № 61-10283sv21.
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu (Ukraina) v skladi kolehii suddiv Druhoi sudovoi palaty Kasatsiinoho Kryminalnoho Sudu vid 30 chervnia 2022 roku u spravi № 460/703/17, provadzhennia № 51-km22.
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu (Ukraina) v skladi kolehii suddiv Druhoi sudovoi palaty Kasatsiinoho Tsyvilnoho Sudu vid 03 serpnia 2022 roku u spravi № 344/1962/19, provadzhennia № 61-3085sv22.
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu (Ukraina) v skladi kolehii suddiv Pershoi sudovoi palaty Kasatsiinoho tsyvilnoho sudu vid 26 zhovtnia 2022 roku u spravi № 572/2718/19, provadzhennia № 61-10218sv21.
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu (Ukraina) v skladi kolehii suddiv Tretoi sudovoi palaty Kasatsiinoho tsyvilnoho sudu vid 30 lystopada 2022 roku u spravi № 344/3764/21, provadzhennia № 61-2466sv22.
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu (Ukraina) v skladi kolehii suddiv Druhoi sudovoi palaty Kasatsiinoho tsyvilnoho sudu vid 23 hrudnia 2022 roku u spravi № 459/3913/21, provadzhennia № 61-10157sv22.
Pravitelstvuyuschij Senat (Ugolovnyj Kassatsionnyj Departament) (Russian Empire), Po delu doktora meditsyny Petra Modlinskago, 19.12.1902, № 33. Reshenija Ugolovnago Kassatsionnago Departamenta Pravitelstvuyuschago Senata za 1902 g. S.-Peterburg: Senatskaja Tipografija., p. 84–91.
Pretty v. United Kingdom, European Court of Human Rights, Judgment of 29 April 2002, App. No. 2346/02, [2002] ECHR 427.
Rechtbank Rotterdam, 01.12.1981, Nederlandse Jurisprudentie 1982, Nr. 63.
Reibl v. Hughes (Supreme Court of Canada), [1980] 2 S.C.R. 880, 07.10.1980.
Reichsgericht (Deutschland), III Strafsenat, Urteil vom 31.05.1894, Rep. 1406/94, ERG Strafsachen Bd. 25., Sache Nr. 127, S. 375–389.
Reyes Jimenez c. Espagne, Cour Européenne des Droites de l’Homme, Troisième Section, 8 mars 2022, Requête no 57020/18.
Rishennia Lypovodolynskoho raionnoho sudu Sumskoi oblasti (Ukraine), 14.11.2018, № 77840579, sprava № 581/625/18.
Rogers v. Whitaker, [1992] H.C.A. 58, 175 C.L.R. 479 (1992), 28.04, 19.11.1992.
Salgo v. Leland Stanford Etc. Bd. Trustees, 317 P. 2d 170 (Cal. Ct. App. 1957), 154 Cal. App. 2d 560, Docket No. 17045, 22.10.1957.
Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hospital, 211 N.Y. 125 (N.Y. 1914); 105 N.E. 92, 14.04.1914.
Supreme Court of Japan, Judgment of 25 April 1995, 1991 (O) 168, Minshu Vol. 49 (4), 1163.
Supreme Court of Japan, Judgment of 29 February 2000, 1998 (O) 1081, Minshu Vol. 49 (2), 582.
Trib. correctionnel de Lyon, 1859, Dall. Per. 1859, III., p. 87–88.
Vyshchyi Spetsializovanyi Sud Ukrainy z rozghliadu Tsyvilnykh i Kryminalnykh Sprav, Ukhvala vid 21.12.2016, Sprava No. 645/323/15-ts.
Wyrok Sądu Okręgowego we Lwowie, Wydzial I Cywilny, 27. Lutego 1939 r., Sygn. akt. I.C.J.1596/37 (Tsentralnyi Derzhavnyi Istorychnyi Arkhiv Ukrainy, m. Lviv, F. 151, op. 4., spr. 405).
Wyrok Sądu Najwyszsego (Izba Cywilna) (II Rzeczpospolita), 8 maja 1934 r., C II Rw. 3048/33, Orzecznictwo Sądów Polskich, T. 13, Poz. 316, str. 315–317.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.