ABSTRACT
In the 1980s the medico-legal landscape looked rather different. Whilst ethical notions of patient autonomy were beginning to seep into the courtroom, the courts’ preoccupation remained rather firmly focussed on supporting doctors to do what would be in the patient’s interests, whether in the context of reproductive decision-making, 1 the withdrawal of treatment from children and infants, 2 or the framing of medical malpractice liability. 3 Notions of patient autonomy had not yet gained dominance in judicial discourse, there was no clearly articulated legal test of mental (in)capacity, 4 the legal basis for decision-making in relation to adults lacking capacity had yet to be articulated by the appellate jurisdictions, 5 and the prospect of looking to what reasonable patients might want to know in order to shape the legal obligations of clinicians seemed an oddly exotic practice carried out in foreign lands. 6
