“Green informed consent” in the classroom, clinic, and consultation room

Abstract

The carbon emissions of global health care activities make up 4–5% of total world emissions, placing it on par with the food sector. Carbon emissions are particularly relevant for health care because of climate change health hazards. Doctors and health care professionals must connect their health care delivery with carbon emissions and minimize resource use when possible as a part of their obligation to do no harm. Given that reducing carbon is a global ethical priority, the informed consent process in health care delivery must change. I argue that the expanded role of bioethicists in this climate crisis is to promote and support “green informed consent:” the sharing of climate information with patients, offering options for lower-carbon health care, and accepting the patient’s right to decline treatments which are deemed too carbon intensive for their values.

Reassessing ‘good’ medical practice and the climate crisis

“…Bringing climate-consciousness into discussions with patients -the notion of "green informed consent" seems especially pertinent where low-carbon treatment alternatives are available. (50) As it happens, research (51) and case studies (52) have demonstrated the public are concerned about the health impacts of climate change, with broad public support for a range of decarbonising measures, including patients willing to change their own behaviours (such as returning unused medications), and responding positively to exploring low-carbon treatments.…”

Physicians’ duty to climate protection as an expression of their professional identity: a defence from Korsgaard’s neo-Kantian moral framework

“…On the other hand, recent literature increasingly highlights how issues of climate protection are integrated in patient-physician communication, for example, to arrive at a 'Green Informed Consent' which is in line with the patient's preferences and values. 24 Philosophical theories of climate ethics 25 26 may serve as starting points for an analysis for ethical duties of preserving the world wide ecosystem, but do not fully account for the specific social and ethical role of physicians as highly trusted professionals.…”