Informed consent and medical malpractice
We will continue to review Case law as a foundation for understanding various concepts necessary to understand the law in regard to healthcare administration. The Canterbury v. Spence case in the background materials dates to 1972, but is considered a “landmark” case in that it established the important concept of the “reasonable person” in regard to informed consent. As clearly explained, the lack of informed consent creates an environment where care providers can be held liable for negligence or torts against a patient. After reviewing the background readings and doing independent research, examine the case Canterbury v. Spence and answer the following: Provide the background information regarding the case and the decision of the court. Explain informed consent and its required elements. What is the reasonable person standard? Why is informed consent important in medical care? What is a hospital’s responsibility in insuring informed consent? Be sure to cite the peer-reviewed literature. Please include an introduction and conclusion paragraph. Please include a reference page with at least 4 scholarly references and use frequent in-text citations. Link for case Study: Canterbury v. Spence, 464 F. 2d 772. Retrieved from https://openjurist.org/464/f2d/772/canterbury-v-spence
