A mentally competent adult woman has the sole authority to consent to her
medical care in all but very limited circumstances. A woman's husband has the
right to veto care that will result in the conception of a child without his explicit
or implied consent. This is limited to vetoing artificial insemination or embryo
transplants. (If such a controversy arises, the medical care practitioner may
want to have his or her attorney review any agreements.) A husband has no
veto or right to be informed of his wife's decisions on contraception,
sterilization, or abortion. The state may also determine what care can be
obtained or refused under its power to protect either the public health and
safety or the best interests of an individual. Unless the state or federal
government has passed a law governing consent or access to the care in
question, the decision rests with the woman and her medical care practitioner.
Medical care practitioners should encourage women to discuss reproductive
choices with their husbands or significant others, but it is improper to require
the husband's consent. No court has allowed a husband to recover from a
medical care practitioner on the theory that the husband had a right to be
consulted about his wife's medical care. Medical care practitioners who obtain
a husband's consent rather than the wife’s (unless the husband is the legal
guardian or has been delegated the right to consent in a durable power of
attorney) can be liable for battery to the wife. A more subtle risk arises when
the husband and wife are estranged or legally separated. In these cases, the
wife’s expectation of privacy is great, and a medical care practitioner who
consults her husband without her permission can be sued for breaching the
confidential relationship. This becomes a serious medical risk if necessary care
is denied or delayed because of a husband’s wishes or because of a delay in
finding the husband, or because the communication to the husband triggers
abuse of the wife.
Medical care practitioners should be very careful about interfering in marital
relationships and about giving out patient information to spouses. If a patient
does not want a spouse or family member to be informed about medical care,
this wish must be honored. In one case, a woman who did not want more
children was taking oral contraceptives without her husband’s knowledge.
When the husband asked the family doctor why the couple had not conceived,
the doctor told the husband about the pills. The husband went home and
severely beat his wife. In this case, the medical care practitioner could be held
liable for the beating because it was a foreseeable consequence of the medical
care practitioner’s improper disclosure of private medical information.