Every adult should be aware of the consequences and risks inherent with certain medical procedures in order to properly make the decision to forego medical treatment. Deriving from this reasoning is the doctrine of informed consent. As such, a physician owes a patient the duty to disclose all significant medical information that the physician possesses or should possess that would be material to the patient’s decision on whether or not to undergo the procedure. The information is material when a reasonable person would attach significance to this information in making their decision. In order to succeed, the plaintiff must also be able to show that if the plaintiff or a reasonable person would have known of this information he or she would not have proceeded with the treatment.
Informed consent is a cause of action based on the proposition disclose that a patient can only give consent to medical procedures if the patient is aware of certain risk and possible outcomes. This standard is a doctor must disclose in a reasonable manner all significant medical information that the physician possesses or reasonably should possess that is material to an intelligent decision by the patient whether to undergo a proposed procedure. The reasoning behind this theory is if the patient was noticed the unrevealed he would have not undergone the treatment and objectively that a reasonable person would have refused the treatment had full information had been given.
**The choice of a lawyer is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements.**
**Past results do not serve as a guarantee of future results.**
**The information on this St. Louis personal injury website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.**