In Prevost v. Ali, the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal found that internet research done by the patient does not constitute the "outside information" necessary to negate a doctor's disclosure obligation.
The exemption for the disclosure obligation comes from Ferguson v. Hamilton Civic Hospitals, which states that outside information may negate a doctor's duty to disclose if the patient is “properly informed by or from some person or source.” As stated in Ferguson, at the heart of that analysis is the question of whether “the patient is subjected to the procedure, he or she has been properly informed by or from some person or source."
In Prevost, Jackson J.A., writing for a unanimous court, refused to apply this reasoning to a situation where the patient has conducted their own research over the internet, and it is impossible to verify the material researched, the patient’s comprehension of the material, or the material’s influence over the patient’s decision to accept the surgery. The doctor admitted that he never discussed the risks of surgery with the patient. Consequently, Justice Jackson held that the patient was not properly informed as per the Ferguson test and upheld the damage award at trial.
April 20, 2011
Link to Decision
Leo Elias & Liam Oster
*
No comments:
Post a Comment