Some attorneys are saying a new ruling on informed consent will sow confusion in the medical industry and lead to an uptick in legal disputes. Others say it just clears up conflicting case law and aids in reducing the number of medical malpractice claims in Pennsylvania. But one thing is for sure—attorneys in the Keystone State are talking about the decision in Shinal v. Toms.
The state Supreme Court’s ruling was issued June 20, and what has grabbed the attention of attorneys across Pennsylvania is the holding that informed consent requires direct communication between doctors and patients. Or, as Justice David Wecht said in the 41-page majority opinion, “a physician’s duty to provide information to a patient sufficient to obtain her informed consent is non-delegable.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
