We often hear people say that if they or their loved one had understood the medical risks involved, they never would have consented to the procedure. For a Las Vegas medical malpractice attorney, this type of comment sends out a warning signal for possible medical malpractice.
Nevada Revised Statute (NRS) 41A.110 defines a medical practitioner’s or dentist’s responsibility for obtaining consent and informing patients. When patients receive a medical, surgical or dental procedure, professionals must do the following:
- Explain the procedure in general terms without specific details
- Explain alternative methods of treatment and the general nature of that treatment
- Explain any risks involved with the procedure, which includes the general nature and extent of the risks
- Obtain the patient’s signature on a statement containing an explanation of the procedure, alternative treatment methods and risks involved
Meador v. Stahler and Gheridian is an example of an informed consent medical malpractice case. Attorneys argued this case in Massachusetts. The case involved a mother who was opposed to a c-section. Her lawyer claimed that even though she signed a consent form that allowed a c-section in the case of emergency, the physician disregarded the patient’s wishes and misrepresented the risks and benefits of vaginal birth when she was progressing normally during labor.
Medical malpractice cases are often complicated, and a Las Vegas medical malpractice attorney can determine whether grounds exist for a case and what the prospects are for winning.
Huggins & Maxwell offers a free consultation to discuss medical malpractice and evaluate your case.