When patients seek medical care, they trust their doctors to explain the risks, benefits, and alternatives of proposed treatments. This process, known as informed consent, is a fundamental part of medical ethics and patient rights.
Without proper consent, medical professionals risk violating legal and ethical standards, potentially leading to a medical malpractice claim. Attorney Thomas Corrington has extensive experience handling cases where a lack of informed consent resulted in serious harm to patients in New Orleans, Louisiana.
Informed consent means a patient agrees to a medical procedure after receiving adequate information about the risks, benefits, and alternatives. This process involves more than just signing a form—it requires a meaningful discussion between the doctor and patient.
Explanation of the procedure: Doctors must clearly describe what the treatment involves, including the steps, duration, and expected outcomes.
Disclosure of risks and benefits: Patients must be informed of potential side effects, complications, and the likelihood of success.
Discussion of alternatives: Doctors should present other treatment options, including their risks and benefits.
Assessment of patient understanding: Medical professionals must confirm that the patient comprehends the information provided.
Voluntary agreement: Consent must be given freely without coercion or pressure.
Failure to obtain informed consent before a procedure may lead to medical malpractice if it results in harm to the patient. However, not every case of missing or inadequate consent qualifies as malpractice.
The patient was unaware of significant risks: If a doctor fails to disclose a known risk and the patient suffers harm from it, there may be grounds for a claim.
The patient would have declined treatment if properly informed: If a reasonable person would have refused the procedure knowing the risks, lack of informed consent could constitute malpractice.
The treatment differed from what was consented to: If a doctor performs a different procedure without the patient’s approval, this may be a violation of consent.
The patient was not mentally capable of consenting: If a patient was unconscious, sedated, or otherwise unable to understand the information, valid consent may not have been obtained.
Not every medical procedure requires explicit informed consent. There are situations where doctors may proceed with treatment without prior patient approval.
Life-threatening conditions: If a patient is unconscious or unable to consent, doctors may proceed with necessary treatment to save their life.
No time for consent: In emergencies where delaying treatment could result in serious harm, doctors are generally allowed to act without formal consent.
Patient waiver: Some patients may voluntarily waive their right to detailed information about risks and alternatives.
Public health requirements: In cases involving public health threats, such as infectious disease treatment, certain procedures may be mandated without individual consent.
For a successful medical malpractice claim based on lack of consent, the patient must prove specific legal elements.
Duty of disclosure: The medical provider had an obligation to provide relevant information before treatment.
Failure to inform: The doctor did not fully disclose the necessary risks, benefits, or alternatives.
Injury or harm resulted: The patient suffered harm as a direct result of the undisclosed risk.
A reasonable person would have refused treatment: The patient must show that, had they been fully informed, they would have chosen not to undergo the procedure.
Lack of informed consent claims often arise in various medical settings. Here are some real-world examples where patients have successfully pursued claims.
Unreported complications: A patient agrees to a routine surgery but later experiences nerve damage that was not disclosed.
Performing a different procedure: A surgeon removes an organ without prior discussion or consent.
Failure to disclose side effects: A doctor prescribes a medication without warning the patient of severe potential side effects.
Allergic reactions: A patient is given a drug without being asked about known allergies, leading to severe complications.
Lack of discussion on risks: A patient agrees to an experimental treatment without understanding the associated risks and possible failure rates.
Unapproved medical devices: A surgeon implants a device that has not been approved for widespread use without informing the patient.
While signed consent forms are an important part of the informed consent process, they don’t automatically shield doctors from liability.
Lack of detailed explanation: Some forms contain only general language without listing specific risks or alternatives.
Failure to confirm patient understanding: Patients may sign a form without truly understanding the details of the procedure.
Changes in treatment plan: If a doctor alters the procedure after obtaining consent, the original form may no longer be valid.
When a lack of informed consent leads to medical malpractice, the consequences can be life-altering for patients and their families.
Physical harm: Patients may experience preventable injuries, complications, or long-term disabilities.
Emotional distress: Suffering due to an unexpected outcome can cause anxiety, depression, or trauma.
Financial burden: The costs of additional medical treatment, lost income, and legal fees can place significant strain on families.
If a patient believes they suffered harm due to lack of informed consent, seeking legal guidance is essential. A lawyer can help determine if there’s a valid medical malpractice claim and assist in gathering evidence.
Steps a lawyer may take include:
Reviewing medical records: Analyzing documentation to determine what information was provided to the patient.
Consulting medical professionals: Working with experts to assess whether the lack of informed consent led to harm.
Filing legal action: Preparing and submitting legal documents to hold the responsible parties accountable.
Negotiating settlements: Pursuing fair compensation for medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering.
Medical malpractice cases involving informed consent can be legally complicated, requiring a thorough understanding of patient rights and state-specific regulations.
Different disclosure requirements: Some states follow a “reasonable physician” standard, while others use a “reasonable patient” standard to determine if enough information was provided.
Statute of limitations: Patients must file claims within a specific time frame, which varies by state.
Damage caps: Some states limit the amount of compensation a patient can receive for medical malpractice claims.
The patient was informed: Doctors may argue that they provided adequate information, and the patient acknowledged the risks.
The patient would have consented anyway: Even if some information was omitted, the doctor might claim the patient would have agreed to the procedure regardless.
The risk was unforeseeable: If a complication was extremely rare or unknown at the time of treatment, a lack of disclosure may not constitute malpractice.
If you believe a lack of informed consent caused harm, The Corrington Law Firm is here to help. Attorney Thomas Corrington has the experience to evaluate your case and fight for your rights. The firm serves clients in New Orleans, Louisiana. Contact our office to discuss your legal options.
Losing a loved one is never easy, but when that loss is caused by another party’s negligence or wrongdoing, the emotional and financial strain can be overwhelming. Working through this challenging chapter requires experienced and compassionate legal support.
Medical malpractice claims often require testimony from professionals in the healthcare field. Courts rely on these witnesses to explain medical standards, evaluate whether a healthcare provider's actions were appropriate, and determine if negligence occurred.
