A Louisiana appellate court dealt with an interesting informed consent issue in Roberts v. Marx last week.
Plaintiff sues Defendant, a urologist, for complications from an elective vasectomy. Plaintiff alleged that he would not have had the procedure if he had been informed that the doctor had had eye surgery just days before the operation.
The court said that this issue was not one of informed consent but one of negligence. This means that the eye surgery would need to in some way be linked to the plaintiff’s alleged injuries. Because there was no nexus, the court dismissed the case.
I agree with the opinion. Should the doctor have told the patient about his eye surgery? Absolutely. But no negligence resulted from that failure to disclose which is what the case should really be about.
You can find the court’s opinion here.