This article critically examines the nature, scope, role and function as well as the pros and cons of disclosure documents as a means of procuring a patient's informed consent to proposed medical intervention. The conclusion reached is that, although the disadvantages of disclosure documents outnumber and outweigh their benefits, they should not be denied a role and function. Disclosure documents may be useful instruments for furnishing the basic information that a prudent patient would require to come to a decision whether to undergo or refuse the proposed medical intervention, but individual disclosure tailored to fit the actual circumstances of the particular patient can only be achieved by means of a disclosure conversation between doctor and patient. Hence, disclosure documents may serve as a supplement to but not as a substitute for a disclosure conversation.