Explore the key changes to Poland’s Code of Medical Ethics that took effect on 1.01.2025. Find out about doctors’ new duties and entitlements and how the amendments affect medical practice.
The Code of Medical Ethics (KEL) is the foundation of the ethical standards applying to doctors in Poland. Changes in professional ethics have been gradual since the original KEL was adopted in 1991 and amended in 1993 and 2003. The revision adopted on 18.05.2024 and effective from 1.01.2025 introduces a number of important modifications intended not only to simplify the language but also to define doctors’ duties more precisely. Below, we analyse the key changes compared with previous versions of the KEL.
1. Article 6 KEL – treatment methods and limits on medical interventions
Previous rules:
* Doctors were free to choose treatment methods, but the use of the word ‘should’ could be read as a recommendation rather than a duty.
* There was a general requirement to limit interventions to those genuinely necessary in light of current medical knowledge.
New version (from 1.01.2025):
* The provision replaces ‘should’ with ‘is required to’, removing ambiguity in interpretation.
* The revised Code expressly prohibits methods that have not been scientifically verified, thereby excluding, among other things, unsubstantiated alternative medicine.
* The change is intended to improve patient safety by defining unequivocally the limits on the use of medical methods.
2. Article 12 KEL – use of artificial intelligence in medicine
Previous rules:
* The previous Code did not contain detailed rules on the use of modern technologies such as artificial intelligence.
New version:
* A doctor may use AI-based solutions provided that the patient’s informed consent has been obtained and only certified systems are used.
* The final treatment decision remains with the doctor, preserving clinical autonomy and protecting patients against risks arising from automated algorithms.
* This provision aligns the KEL with EU rules on medical devices and artificial intelligence.
3. Article 16 KEL – procedures for obtaining patient consent
Previous rules (Article 15 KEL):
* The previous rules required consent but did not always specify how to proceed when a patient was unable to give it.
* There was no unequivocal guidance governing a situation in which a patient could not express their wishes.
New version (Article 16 KEL):
* The provision specifies that a doctor may begin diagnostic, therapeutic or preventive procedures only after obtaining the patient’s informed consent.
* If consent cannot be obtained, the doctor must apply to a person legally authorised to act for the patient or the court, consistently with Article 32(2) of the Polish Act on the Professions of Physician and Dentist.
* The revision also emphasises the form in which consent or refusal may be expressed. Both oral and implied forms are permissible, providing flexibility while maintaining legal certainty.
4. Article 33 KEL – definition of medically futile treatment
Previous rules:
* The previous rules used the term ‘persistent therapy’, which was controversial and open to differing interpretations.
New version:
* ‘Persistent therapy’ has been replaced with ‘medically futile treatment’, a term that more precisely describes medical interventions offering no benefit to the patient.
* A team of doctors decides whether to withhold resuscitation or further interventions, taking the patient’s wishes into account wherever possible.
* The change is intended to eliminate procedures that may be regarded as unethical or ineffective while making the decision-making process more transparent.
5. Articles 41 and 42 KEL – integrity of medical records
Previous rules:
* The previous rules required the content of medical documentation to be consistent with the doctor’s knowledge and conscience, which allowed for subjective interpretation.
New version:
* The revision introduces a duty to maintain medical records reliably and carefully, with an emphasis on the doctor’s knowledge and competence.
* Certificates and other documents must be based on current examinations and the patient’s records, with the aim of preventing misuse.
* The change is regarded as reflecting a commitment to the quality of medical care and protection of patients’ interests.
6. Article 48 KEL – rules on medical experiments
Previous rules:
* The previous rules required an experimental protocol to be submitted to an ethics committee for approval but did not define the methodological requirements clearly.
New version:
* The experimental protocol must be designed in accordance with the appropriate methodological requirements, and the experiment may begin only after a favourable opinion has been obtained from an independent bioethics committee.
* The change is intended to protect patients against methodologically unsound experiments and to align the KEL with generally applicable law.
7. Articles 71, 73 and 78 KEL – advertising and public statements
Previous rules:
* The previous rules prohibited advertising and the commercial use of a doctor’s name and image, limiting the ability to provide information about services offered.
New version:
* Doctors are entitled to provide information about the medical services they offer, provided that the communications comply with the principles of medical ethics.
* The prohibition on using a doctor’s authority for purposes unrelated to professional practice remains in force.
* Requiring public statements in both traditional and electronic media to be based on current medical knowledge makes communications more transparent and credible.
Summary
The revision of the Code of Medical Ethics introduces a number of important changes intended to raise ethical standards in the medical profession and adapt the rules to the challenges of modern medicine. Precisely defined duties concerning medical methods, AI technologies, patient consent, record-keeping and medical experiments have a significant effect on everyday clinical practice. Changes concerning advertising and public statements also allow doctors to communicate effectively about their services while maintaining high ethical standards.
For doctors, lawyers and other members of the medical community, the revised KEL provides a reference point for improving procedures and building trust in relationships with patients. They should examine the new rules carefully and implement best practice in their day-to-day work.
