Schloendorff v. Cardozo, articulated a principle that continues to shape doctor-patient relationships today: every competent adult has the right to determine what shall be done with their own body. On top of that, decided by the New York Court of Appeals in 1914, the case emerged from a troubling situation in which a physician performed surgery on a patient who had explicitly refused the operation. S. Supreme Court Justice Benjamin N. Society of New York Hospital stands as a cornerstone of modern medical ethics and patient rights law. Practically speaking, the ruling, authored by the future U. While the decision also shielded the hospital from liability under the legal doctrines of its time, its most enduring legacy lies in the foundation it laid for informed consent and the legal concept of medical battery.
Background of the Case
Mary Schloendorff was admitted to the Society of New York Hospital for treatment of a stomach condition. Before the procedure, she consented to an examination while under ether, but she specifically refused to undergo any surgical operation. She made it clear to the medical staff that she did not want surgery performed under any circumstances That's the whole idea..
You'll probably want to bookmark this section.
While Schloendorff was anesthetized, the attending physicians discovered a fibroid tumor. Despite her prior refusal, they proceeded to remove the tumor. When Schloendorff regained consciousness and learned that surgery had been performed against her expressed wishes, she filed a lawsuit against the hospital, alleging that the unauthorized operation constituted a battery.
The case eventually reached the New York Court of Appeals, the state’s highest court. The central question was whether a physician could lawfully perform an operation that the
