Jurisprudence and legal responsibility for the adequacy of informed consent in medical innocence

One of the most important issues in medical law and acquit the effect of satisfaction on the physician's responsibility and whether the effect of informed consent requirement was acquitted on a charge of the same doctor¡ Leave alone if you do not blame the doctor and the patient is informed and comply with all technical and scientific standards of medical doctors will eliminate civil and criminal liability As the effect of the presumption of innocence, the right precautions and medical malpractice or liability shall be. In this paper, we plan to investigate the pros and cons and criticism of jurists and lawyers are sufficiently informed consent of acquittal on the charge of doctor, provided exemptions from liability, responsibility of the physician to adjust to shift the burden of proof because the doctor's patients ¡Unlike the famous jurists that the former law was based on his opinion And strict liability without fault of the doctor in Articles 319, 320 and 321 of the Penal Code of the former was evident; But this problem has been resolved in the Penal Code Act 1392 and Article 495 of the fault has been responsible physician bound¡ This study is a descriptive - analytical definitions and understanding of the principles, rules and referring to the jurisprudence of the "traditional method with disciplined analysis" rights "rational method of descriptive language" explained. Finally, informed consent in accordance with the views expressed by the condition of the patient has a similar function has been acquitted of liability and depends on the nature and limits of the patient's permission, which permission to waste time (in terms of nonfamous jurists) and sometimes restricted or conditional permission to health (famous jurists).