constitutes informed consent. The first, or "professional" standard says that the scope of the physician's duty to disclose is determined by the prevailing or customary disclosure practice in the medical or dental community. A variation of this standard has also been used, where the physician has the duty to disclose the risks which a reasonable physician in the community, of like training, would customarily disclose under the same circumstances.
The second, or "prudent patient" standard says that the duty to disclose depends upon the lay standard of reasonableness, established independently of the medical community. Under this standard, the physician must disclose enough information which would allow a reasonably prudent person in the patient's particular situation to accept or decline a particular treatment. This standard requires the presentation of expert testimony as to the reasonableness of the disclosure. It should be noted that under certain circumstances there will be no need for expert testimony when the facts of the case are clear enough for the jury to understand without guidance.
The third standard is a subjective one. This requires testimony from the patient that he or she would not have given consent to a procedure if the physician had disclosed the risks. The patient is not required to present expert testimony to prove that the physician did not provide the necessary information; the jury must determine whether the physician's disclosure was reasonable under the circumstances. This standard makes a physician liable for malpractice if he or she performs any procedure without the patient's consent. This standard also recognizes a patient's right to refuse any treatment, even if the treatment is necessary according to the prevailing
...