Examination of informed consent within the framework of supreme judicial decisions in the Republic of Turkey and approaches of physicians to informed consent

Human rights are the most basic right to life. This right is tried to be guaranteed by a number of regulations around the world. Every individual has the right to be autonomous. This right can be violated in many areas as well as in the field of health. People apply to a physician or healthcare provider when they lose their health. Here, some attempts are made for body integrity in order to restore the health of the person, reduce or eliminate the pain. There are certain criteria for these interventions to be qualified as medical interventions. But first of all, in order for these interventions to be applied, the patient must consent to the intervention to be made at a level that will have complete information about the disease. These interventions can be evaluated over a wide range. Starting with a simple medical intervention, it is called medical intervention in the most severe surgical interventions. However, the person must understand the intervention to be made and consent to the negative situations that may occur with the benefit to be obtained as a result of the intervention. Informed consent is an agreement that emerged as a contract between the patient and the authorized person (s) to perform the intervention. Informed consent not only establishes trust with the patient, but also serves as the basic proof of evidence in terms of legal situations that may arise afterwards. In practice, informed consent is perceived as a burden by healthcare professionals, but is actually a protective mechanism. Informed consent is a milestone at the point of contact with the patient, but it is also necessary to eliminate the legal adverse events that may occur. The aim of this study is to emphasize the place of informed consent in medical interventions and its necessity for the parties.