1. Actually, the Health Act 2005 provides that no treatment may be initiated or continued without the informed consent of the patient, unless otherwise established by law or regulation. Informed consent is “consent given based on appropriate information provided by a health care person”. In order to be valid the consent must be actually given for a specific treatment. It is not possible to give a valid consent in advance or a blanket consent covering all situations.
2. The contents of information preceding informed consent. The patient has a right to receive information regarding his state of health and the options for treatment, including the risk of complications and side-effects. The information must be provided continuously and provide a comprehensible presentation of the illness, the examination and the planned treatment. Information must be provided in a respectful form and be adjusted to the individual capabilities of the patient with respect to age, maturity, experience etc. Furthermore, the information must contain details on relevant prevention, treatment and nursing options, including information on other medically justifiable options for treatment, and information on consequences of non-treatment. Information must be more comprehensive when the treatment includes a higher risk of serious complications and side effects.
   A patient has a right to decline information. Although “not informed” the consent of the patient is legally valid: “a valid consent might well be issued by a patient who has not at all or only to a limited extent requested information”.
3. The Health Act 2005 contains provisions related to refusal of consent in two specific situation: blood or blood products can be refused by a patient  based on information from a health care provider on the health consequences of the rejection of blood or blood products as part of the treatment. No form is prescribed as to the refusal of consent. In case it is against the ethical perception of the health care provider to perform a treatment without the use of blood or blood products, he is not required to do so, but he may refer the patient to another health care provider, unless there is a need for immediate medical attention; and a terminally ill patient may reject treatment which can only defer the moment of death. Also in this case no form is prescribed. This provision emphasizes that the patient’s right to self determination also applies to mentally competent, terminally ill patients. With regard to withdrawal of consent, the informed consent can be withdrawn by the patient at any time.
4. In Denmark minor patients who have attained the age of 15 are considered to be capable to provide informed consent. Parents must however be informed and be included in the decision-making process. If a minor of 15 years or older is unable to provide informed consent his parents are competent to do so. Under the age of 15 years parents must always consent to a medical intervention.
5. Whether a treatment can be initiated when a patient is incompetent and not capable of exercising his self determination rights depends on whether there is anyone entitled by law to represent the patient. With regard to incompetent adult patients Danish law distinguishes between permanently incompetent patients and temporarily incompetent patients. When a patient is permanently unable to provide informed consent the closest relative or when the patient is under guardianship, the guardian can provide informed consent. For persons who are temporarily incompetent Danish Law does not permit informed consent by the closest relative. Apart from the situation where a guardian is appointed who is allowed to take decisions in health matters as well, the law does not regulate who may give informed consent during the period that someone is temporarily incompetent.

Top