What is the legal test for a surgeon to determine whether a patient’s hypothetical choice to refuse treatment should be based solely on the testimony of the patient at trial?

Alberta, Canada


The following excerpt is from Malinowski v. Schneider, 2010 ABQB 734 (CanLII):

The legal test for this analysis is clearly established. In Reibl v. Hughes, 1980 CanLII 23 (SCC), [1980] 2 S.C.R. 880, 114 D.L.R. (3d) 1, Laskin C.J.C. considered the question of whether a patient’s hypothetical choice to engage in or refuse treatment should be based strictly on the testimony of the patient at trial: ... Merely because medical evidence establishes the reasonableness of a recommended operation does not mean that a reasonable person in the patient's position would necessarily agree to it, if proper disclosure had been made of the risks attendant upon it, balanced by those against it. The patient's particular situation and the degree to which the risks of surgery or no surgery are balanced would reduce the force, on an objective appraisal, of the surgeon's recommendation. Admittedly, if the risk of foregoing the surgery would be considerably graver to a patient than the risks attendant upon it, the objective standard would favour exoneration of the surgeon who has not made the required disclosure. ... In saying that the test is based on the decision that a reasonable person in the patient's position would have made, I should make it clear that the patient's particular concerns must also be reasonably based ... In short, although account must be taken of a patient's particular position, a position which will vary with the patient, it must be objectively assessed in terms of reasonableness.

Cory J. succinctly described this ‘objective/subjective’ assessment as “... whether a reasonable person in the circumstances of the plaintiff would have consented to the proposed treatment if all the risks had been disclosed.” (Arndt v. Smith, 1997 CanLII 360 (SCC), [1997] 2 S.C.R. 539 at 554, 148 D.L.R. (4th) 48). 2. Evidence

Other Questions


Does lack of negligence in the choice of treatment or the manner in which the treatment was performed negate a physician's additional duty to inform the patient of the risks involved in the recommended treatment? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the legal test for analysis of a patient’s hypothetical choice? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the standard of review for the purpose of determining whether a trial judge made a palpable and overriding error? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the test for determining whether there is a genuine issue for trial? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the test for determining whether a defendant has a right to a speedy trial when there has been a long delay? (Alberta, Canada)
Is it necessary for the trial judge to determine whether this residence was unfit for habitation? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the legal test for determining whether a question of mixed fact and law is correct or palpable and overriding error? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the test for a jury to determine whether a trial can be conveniently conducted by a jury? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the test for determining whether a medical form is "informative" to a patient? (Alberta, Canada)
What factors are considered to be determinative in determining whether a medical malpractice case is successful or unsuccessful? (Alberta, Canada)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.