Medical Malpractice Truism a Signature Does Not Completely Absolve the Consenting Party

𝘿𝙤𝙚𝙨 𝙞𝙣𝙛𝙤𝙧𝙢𝙚𝙙 𝙘𝙤𝙣𝙨𝙚𝙣𝙩 𝙖𝙛𝙛𝙚𝙘𝙩 𝙈𝙚𝙙𝙈𝙖𝙡 𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙞𝙜𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣?

𝙔𝙀𝙎. It either makes the case .... 𝙤𝙧 𝙗𝙧𝙚𝙖𝙠𝙨 𝙞𝙩


What is informed consent❓

Per the NIH:

"The process in which a health care provider educates a patient about the risks, benefits, and alternatives of a given procedure of intervention"


How does this affect anesthesia MedMal litigation❓

The consent must be frank, succinct, and appropriate

➡️Risks
1. The risks for general anesthesia are extensive
2. The average patient won't understand them all
3. The time spent explaining risks may be short or long

➡️Benefits
1. The procedure or surgery gets done
2. The patient is not awake for a procedure
3. The patient is not in horrific pain during a procedure

➡️Alternatives
1. The other option is not to proceed at all
2. The individual may opt for no anesthesia at all
3. The other options may be regional, local, or sedation


Does signing on the bottom line of a consent form relieve the healthcare "provider" of all liability❓

The answer is, of course, 𝙉𝙊.


Here's some examples:

1. Each epidural consent lists "headache"
2. GA consents forms list "tooth damage"
3. Every anesthesia consent form lists "death"
4. All regional block consents list "nerve damage"

But signing on the dotted line 𝘿𝙊𝙀𝙎 𝙉𝙊𝙏 absolve the consenting party of responsibility for these outcomes


If the complications occur due to breaches in standards ... 𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙚 𝙞𝙨 𝙡𝙞𝙖𝙗𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮✅

If the complications occur without any breaches in standards ... 𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙚 𝙞𝙨 𝙣𝙤 𝙡𝙞𝙖𝙗𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮❌

𝙆𝙣𝙤𝙬𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙬𝙝𝙞𝙘𝙝 𝙤𝙣𝙚 𝙞𝙩 𝙞𝙨 𝙧𝙚𝙦𝙪𝙞𝙧𝙚𝙨 𝙥𝙧𝙚𝙘𝙞𝙨𝙞𝙤𝙣 𝙪𝙣𝙙𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙩𝙖𝙣𝙙𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙤𝙛 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙘𝙤𝙣𝙨𝙚𝙣𝙩 𝙥𝙧𝙤𝙘𝙚𝙨𝙨



𝙃𝙖𝙫𝙚 𝙮𝙤𝙪 𝙨𝙚𝙚𝙣 𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙞𝙜𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣 𝙨𝙪𝙧𝙧𝙤𝙪𝙣𝙙𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙘𝙤𝙣𝙨𝙚𝙣𝙩 𝙘𝙧𝙪𝙢𝙗𝙡𝙚? 𝙄 𝙝𝙖𝙫𝙚.