Tennessee
How Arato v. Avedon applies in Tennessee: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Torts (Medical Malpractice – Informed Consent).
Tennessee recognizes the doctrine of informed consent in medical malpractice cases, which mandates that physicians must provide adequate information about the risks, benefits, and alternatives of treatment. The standard of informed consent requires a reasonable practitioner in the same field to disclose information that a reasonable patient would consider significant in making a treatment decision.
In Tennessee, a physician must inform the patient of material risks associated with a proposed treatment, and failure to do so may result in liability for damages if it can be shown that the patient would not have consented to the treatment had they been properly informed.
The court held that a physician's failure to disclose the risks of an elective surgery constituted a breach of the duty of informed consent, leading to liability for resulting injuries.
The court found that the medical professionals did not adequately inform the patient of the potential outcomes, resulting in a judgment for the plaintiff due to lack of informed consent.
The court ruled that the physician was liable for failing to disclose risks that a reasonable patient would have wanted to know before consent.
Tennessee's informed consent standard aligns with the federal standard, which also emphasizes the necessity of disclosing material risks and obtaining patient consent. However, Tennessee law places a particular emphasis on what a reasonable patient would consider significant, which can vary based on the patient’s personal circumstances.
Informed consent is a critical topic in Tennessee tort law, and candidates should be prepared to analyze cases involving disclosure and patient autonomy on the Tennessee bar exam.