The Limits of Informed Consent
Can patients claim damages if they were aware of the risks?
T
he issue
of
informed
consent raises its
head in many
medical malprac-
tice cases.
Usually it hap-
pens with cases
in which the
patient claims
the surgeon
didn't properly
inform him of
the risks associated with a given surgical procedure. But what about
those malpractice cases that don't raise a challenge to consent? Is the
fact that a surgeon made a patient aware of the risks relevant to the
standard of care? Not according to a recent ruling in the case of
Mitchell v. Shikora. Here's why.
The value of consent
When we use the term "informed consent," we're referring to the form
a patient signs authorizing the surgeon to perform a specific proce-
dure, with full knowledge of the inherent risks and potential complica-
tions. The issue played a central role in Mitchell v. Shikora
(osmag.net/EDQa8a), which involved a patient who had her bowel
severed during a hysterectomy performed by an obstetric and gyneco-
logic surgeon at a Pittsburgh, Pa., hospital in May 2012.
2 6 • O U T PA T I E N T S U R G E R Y M A G A Z I N E • S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 7
Medical Malpractice
Amy Redington Riley, JD
• DON'T RUSH Don't ask the patient to sign a consent form just before the anesthesia is
about to be administered.
Jason
Meehan