When patients agree to medical treatment, they have the right to understand what they are consenting to. Physicians cannot simply recommend a procedure and move forward without discussing important information that could affect a patient’s decision. Under Pennsylvania law, doctors have a duty to obtain informed consent before performing certain medical treatments and procedures.
In some situations, a lack of informed consent in Philadelphia may form the basis of a medical malpractice claim — especially if the patient suffers serious complications due to undisclosed treatment risks.
Informed Consent Rules in Pennsylvania
Before performing certain procedures, physicians must provide enough information for a patient to make an informed decision regarding whether to agree to treatment.
Generally, a physician must discuss:
- The nature of the proposed procedure or treatment
- The anticipated benefits
- Material risks of the treatment and potential complications
- Reasonable alternatives to the proposed treatment
- The risks associated with declining treatment
The purpose of these disclosures is to allow patients to weigh their options and decide whether the potential benefits outweigh the risks.
Pennsylvania’s informed consent law applies to many categories of medical care, including:
- Surgical procedures
- Administration of anesthesia
- Radiation or chemotherapy treatments
- Blood transfusions
- Insertion of surgical devices or implants
- Other invasive medical procedures
Often, it is not enough for a physician to merely obtain a signed consent form. Courts often examine whether a provider had meaningful discussions with a patient and whether the patient actually received the information necessary to make an informed choice.
What Physicians Aren’t Liable for or Obligated to Disclose
Patients sometimes assume physicians must warn them about every possible complication. However, Pennsylvania law does not require such a comprehensive disclosure.
Physicians generally are not required to disclose:
- Extremely remote or speculative risks
- Risks that are commonly understood by ordinary patients
- Complications that could not reasonably have been anticipated
- Medical developments unknown at the time of treatment
Likewise, a physician is not automatically liable simply because a procedure produces an unfavorable outcome. Unexpected complications can occur despite a physician meeting the applicable standard of care.
Liability for insufficient disclosures often turns on whether the physician failed to provide material information that a reasonable patient would have considered important when deciding whether to undergo the procedure.
Contact an Experienced Philadelphia Medical Malpractice Lawyer for Help Understanding Consent Issues
Informed consent cases are complicated. Medical providers often claim they provided sufficient information and that a patient consented to the risks. Alternatively, they may claim that a complication wasn’t foreseeable and would not have been affected by informed consent.
These cases often require a careful review of medical records, consent documents, and expert testimony regarding what information should have been disclosed before treatment. If you believe a physician failed to properly inform you of significant risks before a procedure, you may have legal options for recovering compensation for any resulting injuries.
The experienced Philadelphia medical malpractice lawyers at Morris Wilson Knepp Jacquette, P.C. can help you understand your rights. Contact us today for a free consultation.