if i use the certain section not all part of the quote "information that a reasonable person in the patient’s position would, in the circumstances, require to enable the person to make a reasonably informed decision about whether to undergo the treatment or follow the advice;"based one this paragprha From the analysis of the legal arguments and viewpoints of relevant stakeholders above, legal alternatives offer individuals the choice of defining the boundaries of the law and seeking justice according to the Rule of Law. A major legal alternative, from the perspective of doctors, is the concept of proactive and reactive duty of doctor to warn of risk. The Doctor’s duty argument actually is legal concept that due to medical practitioner, a patient missing possibility of better medical int terms of the treatment (Bird, n.d.). Moreover, this concept allows doctors to handle operations without the worry of being sued after the surgery (Tibballs, 2007). This is considered significant due to the fact that doctors can perform well without any pressure and are not obstructed by a low chance of success. Nevertheless, there are additional requirements that must be met in order to prove a loss of opportunity claim due to negligence, including the probability of recovery or survival in the underlying case, as well as the presence of identified causes and a high level of medical certainty. whihch part i use

Question

if i use the certain section not all part of the quote "information that a reasonable person in the patient’s position would, in the circumstances, require to enable the person to make a reasonably informed decision about whether to undergo the treatment or follow the advice;"based one this paragprha From the analysis of the legal arguments and viewpoints of relevant stakeholders above, legal alternatives offer individuals the choice of defining the boundaries of the law and seeking justice according to the Rule of Law. A major legal alternative, from the perspective of doctors, is the concept of proactive and reactive duty of doctor to warn of risk. The Doctor’s duty argument actually is legal concept that due to medical practitioner, a patient missing possibility of better medical int terms of the treatment (Bird, n.d.). Moreover, this concept allows doctors to handle operations without the worry of being sued after the surgery (Tibballs, 2007). This is considered significant due to the fact that doctors can perform well without any pressure and are not obstructed by a low chance of success. Nevertheless, there are additional requirements that must be met in order to prove a loss of opportunity claim due to negligence, including the probability of recovery or survival in the underlying case, as well as the presence of identified causes and a high level of medical certainty. whihch part i use

Answer 1

It appears that you are asking which part of the given paragraph you should use to support your argument. Based on the information provided, you can use the following part of the paragraph:

"A major legal alternative, from the perspective of doctors, is the concept of proactive and reactive duty of the doctor to warn of risk. This concept allows doctors to handle operations without the worry of being sued after the surgery."

This part discusses how the concept of proactive and reactive duty of doctors to warn of risks can provide them with the freedom to perform their duties without the fear of being sued.

Answer 2

Based on the paragraph provided, the relevant section that you can use is: "A major legal alternative, from the perspective of doctors, is the concept of proactive and reactive duty of doctor to warn of risk. The Doctor’s duty argument actually is a legal concept that due to medical practitioner, a patient missing the possibility of better medical int terms of the treatment (Bird, n.d.). Moreover, this concept allows doctors to handle operations without the worry of being sued after the surgery (Tibballs, 2007)."