Court Opinion

ID: 9728406
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 14:07:17.28089+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:25:48.432937
License: Public Domain

NIGRO, Justice,
Dissenting.
I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion since I fail to see how a patient who. specifically asks her physician how many times he has performed a surgical procedure can be said to have given her informed consent to surgery when the physician misleads the patient by grossly exaggerating his experience. As the majority notes, the informed consent doctrine requires a physician to “advise the patient of those material facts, risks, complications and alternatives to surgery that a reasonable person in the patient’s situation would consider significant in deciding whether to have the operation.” Gouse v. Cassel, 532 Pa. 197, 615 A.2d 331, 334 (1992). In my view, evidence that Dr. Patterson misled Cloma Duttry by telling her that he had performed the surgery at issue once a month for five years, i.e., sixty times, when in reality he had performed it only nine times, is clearly a material fact that a reasonable person would consider significant in deciding whether to undergo surgery. Accordingly, I would affirm the Superior Court’s order granting a new trial.