Opinion ID: 869450
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: August 7, 2007 Follow-up Examination

Text: Two days later, on August 7, 2007, Dr. Leder again examined Harris. In the medical records, Dr. Leder noted that he told Harris that he either (1) could perform “traditional cataract surgery” on Harris’s right eye, which would involve replacing the lens, or (2) he could “leave [the] eye as is.” Similarly, Harris’s affidavit stated that “Dr. Leder stated that he had a choice to either do the cataract surgery with the lens implant replacement or leave the right eye as it was.” Harris instructed Dr. Leder to perform the surgery. During the August 7 office visit, Dr. Leder discussed with Harris the specific risks associated with surgery, including: “infection, retinal detach[ment], blindness, glaucoma, 2nd surg[ery].” Harris signed a consent form, dated August 3 Case: 12-12098 Date Filed: 05/24/2013 Page: 4 of 15 7, 2007, authorizing “cataract removal [right] eye, with iol implant.” 1 Harris’s consent form also contained an acknowledgement about risks of the surgery stating: I am aware that the practice of medicine and surgery is not an exact science and I acknowledge that no guarantee or assurance has been made as to the result that may be obtained. The nature and purpose of the above procedure, possible alternative methods of treatment (observation, mydriatics), the risk involved and the possibility of complications including but not limited to infection, hemorrhage, inflammation, need for Yag laser, pain, glaucoma, non-healing, blindness or loss of eye, loss of corneal clarity, diplopia (double vision), pupil abnormalities, breakage of capsule, loss of lens fragments, loss of vitreous, or retinal detachment, need for further surgery, have been fully explained to me by: Douglas R. Leder[,] DO.