Informed Consent Or Full Disclosure
Recently a bill was introduced in Connecticut which would have required chiropractors to give informed consent to all patients prior to any treatment, specifically cervical spinal manipulation, which is perceived by some to represent a stroke risk to patients. The bill was defeated which has many proponents of the legislation up in arms, claiming that chiropractors don’t want to divulge the dangers of cervical manipulation to the public, thus exposing patients to a “dangerous” procedure without adequate disclosure.
On various forums I have seen it said that the bill would have required informed consent from all providers, not just chiropractors. If so, then the bill was defeated not just by a chiropractic movement, which actually might not have been involved, but by others who had an interest in defeating this bill.
I personally don’t have a problem with letting patients know it has been suggested there might be a very slight risk, albeit unproven, of stroke after spinal manipulation, but I do believe the “informed” part of consent should be required across the board by all health care providers.
It would appear that the medical community does not want to put the risks associated with medications, both prescription and over the counter, into plain language that the average person would understand. Nor do they seem to want to do so with medical procedures.
But lets face facts about true risks to patients. The risk of stroke due to cervical manipulation is now estimated to be 1 in 5 million or so. The studies to date even suggest that patients who have suffered stroke were probably in the process of having the stroke already and had they gone to their PCP and never received cervical spinal manipulation, would still have had the stroke. Essentially, there is little or no true evidence that any cervical manipulation has ever caused a single stroke. Some “science based” bloggers have suggested that there is the equivalent of a “smoking gun” to suggest a danger, but that is just an anti-chiropractic bias coming to the forefront, in an attempt to continue the denigration of non-medical associated health care. It is a weak attempt at best, but appears to be satisfying among their other “science based” cronies.
The fact of the matter is, if anyone should be afraid of informed consent it should be the medical health care providers and the pharmaceutical companies. A brief search of the Internet will reveal article after article, many from respected medical journals like JAMA, stating the risks and dangers of medical procedures, drug reactions, pharmaceutical errors and medical mistakes. All combined, un-necessary deaths caused by the afore mentioned is estimated to be the number three cause of death in the US. It might possibly be higher.
The medical community claims to give informed consent (apparently not in Connecticut) but I simply do not see the “full disclosure” that they and the anti-chiropractic community are asking of chiropractors with respect to spinal manipulation.
