Informed Consent under Health Law
Definition of Informed Consent
Informed consent is a legal and ethical doctrine in health law that requires healthcare providers to disclose sufficient information to a patient so that the patient can make a voluntary and knowledgeable decision about their medical treatment.
It is grounded in the principles of patient autonomy and bodily integrity — meaning that no medical procedure should be performed without the patient’s agreement, except in certain emergency or legally authorized situations.
Elements of Informed Consent
To satisfy legal standards, informed consent generally requires that the following elements are met:
Disclosure – The healthcare provider must disclose:
The nature and purpose of the proposed treatment.
The risks and potential complications.
The benefits and likelihood of success.
Reasonable alternatives, including no treatment.
The risks and consequences of refusing treatment.
Comprehension – The patient must understand the information presented. Providers must use layman’s terms and assess the patient's level of understanding.
Voluntariness – Consent must be given freely, without coercion or undue influence.
Competency – The patient must be legally and mentally capable of making healthcare decisions.
Consent – The patient must explicitly agree, usually in writing, particularly for invasive or high-risk procedures.
Legal Significance
Informed consent transforms what could otherwise be a battery (unauthorized touching) into a lawful medical procedure. Without proper consent, even a successful and beneficial procedure may result in liability.
Landmark Case Law
1. Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hospital (1914)
Fact: A woman consented to an examination under anesthesia but explicitly declined surgery. The surgeon performed a tumor removal while she was unconscious.
Holding: Justice Benjamin Cardozo famously stated:
“Every human being of adult years and sound mind has a right to determine what shall be done with his own body.”
Significance: Established the foundation of informed consent in American law.
2. Canterbury v. Spence (1972)
Fact: A patient underwent back surgery and was left paralyzed. He claimed he was not informed of the risk.
Holding: The court held that the physician has a duty to disclose all information that a reasonable patient would consider significant in making a decision.
Significance: Shifted the standard of disclosure from a "professional standard" (what a reasonable doctor would disclose) to a patient-centered standard.
3. Cobbs v. Grant (1972) [California]
Fact: A patient developed complications following surgery and sued, arguing he wasn't informed of the risks.
Holding: Reinforced the Canterbury rule — emphasizing the reasonable patient standard for disclosure.
Significance: Clarified that patients must be informed of material risks even if rare, as long as they are significant.
4. Montgomery v. Lanarkshire Health Board (2015, UK Supreme Court)
Fact: A diabetic pregnant woman was not warned of the risk of shoulder dystocia during delivery, which led to complications for the baby.
Holding: Doctors must ensure the patient is aware of any material risks involved in a recommended treatment and of reasonable alternatives.
Significance: Though UK-based, it influences global perspectives on patient-centered care.
Exceptions to Informed Consent
Emergency Situations – When the patient is unconscious or otherwise incapable and delay would threaten life or health.
Therapeutic Privilege – Rare and controversial; allows withholding information if disclosure would severely harm the patient (e.g., causing extreme anxiety).
Waiver by the Patient – A patient can voluntarily waive their right to be informed, but this must be documented clearly.
Types of Consent
Express Consent: Clearly stated, orally or in writing (e.g., surgical consent forms).
Implied Consent: Assumed based on the patient's actions (e.g., extending an arm for a blood draw).
Informed Consent: A higher standard than general consent, requiring disclosure of risks and alternatives.
Documentation and Best Practices
Use consent forms tailored to the specific procedure.
Note discussions in the medical record.
Provide opportunities for questions and verify understanding.
Use interpreters if language barriers exist.
Conclusion
Informed consent is not just a signed form — it is a process of communication that respects the patient’s rights and autonomy. Courts increasingly favor a patient-centered standard that requires full disclosure of material risks and options. Healthcare providers must balance medical judgment with clear, respectful dialogue to fulfill this critical legal and ethical obligation.
RELATED Blog
0 comments