Because of the lack of adequate information in many physicians' charts, it is sometimes not possible to find that the physician discussed informed consent with risks and complications and alternative treatments. The law in some jurisdictions allows the use of usual and customary practice to establish that the physician has informed the patient.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BrounKSDixGEImwinkelriedEJKayeDHMostellerRPRobertsEF. McCormick on Evidence §195, at 825. (4th ed.1992) (StrongJohn W., ed.).
2.
WalterP. The doctrine of informed consent: To inform or not to inform?St John's Law Rev. 1997;71:543.
3.
Schloendorff v New York Hospital, 211 NY 125 (1914), 105 NE 92 (NY 1914) (Justice Benjamin Cardoza).
4.
PegalisSEWachsmanHF. American Law of Medical Malpractice §4:1, at 185–186 (2nd ed.1992).
5.
Zalazar v Vercimak, 261 Ill App3d 250, 199 Ill Dec 232, 633 NE2d 1223 (Ill App 3 Dist 1993).
6.
FishmanC. Jones on Evidence: Civil and Criminal §18.8, at 683 (7th ed.1998).
7.
WardJL. Physician habit evidence in informed consent cases. J Leg Med. 2002;23:269–282.
8.
Bloskas v Murray, 646 P2d 907 (Colo 1982).
9.
Crawford v Fayez, 435 SE2d 545 (NC App 1993).
10.
Cardinal v Family Foot Care Centers Inc, 532 NE2d 162 (Ohio App 1987).
11.
Weil v Seltzer, 873 F2d 1453 (DC Cir 1989).
12.
Hoffart v Hodge, 609 NW2d 397 (Neb App 2000).
13.
BlackmanNSBaileyCP. Liability in Medical Practice: A Reference for Physicians. 1990:200.
14.
ShiffmanMA. Recall dysfunction: Significance in the postoperative patient. Int J Cosmetic Surg Aesthetic Dermatol. 2003;5:23–26.
