Consent: Tennessee to Follow an Objective Standard for Informed Consent-Ashe V. Radiation Oncology Assocs

By Stuart, Michael B. | American Journal of Law & Medicine, January 1, 2000 | Go to article overview

Consent: Tennessee to Follow an Objective Standard for Informed Consent-Ashe V. Radiation Oncology Assocs


Stuart, Michael B., American Journal of Law & Medicine


Consent: Tennessee to Follow an Objective Standard of Informed Consent-Ashe v. Radiation Oncology Assoc.1--The Supreme Court of Tennessee held that the standard to determine informed consent is whether a reasonable person in the patient's position would have consented to the procedure or treatment if adequately informed of all significant risks.2 The plaintiff, Patricia Ashe, was diagnosed with breast cancer in 1988. She underwent a double mastectomy and chemotherapy. However, in 1993, she discovered that the cancer had moved to her lungs. Ashe was referred to the defendant, Dr. Steven Stroup, who prescribed radiation treatment. Subsequently, Ashe sustained radiation myelitis caused by a permanent radiation injury to her spinal cord and was rendered paraplegic. Ashe then brought an informed consent claim against Dr. Stroup.3

The trial court found that Ashes trial testimony conflicted with her deposition testimony regarding whether she would have consented to the procedure had she been warned of the risk of spinal cord injury. The trial court struck the trial testimony stating that she would not have undergone the procedure and granted Dr. Stroup a directed verdict on the deposition testimony where Ashe stated she was unsure whether she would have undergone the procedure. Ashe appealed and the appellate court held that as part of Ashes informed consent claim she was required to prove that a reasonable person knowing of the risk for spinal cord injury would have decided not to undergo the procedure. The court held that the discrepancy between the trial testimony and the deposition testimony went to the issue of credibility and that the trial court testimony should not have been stricken. The appellate court reversed the trial court's grant of a directed verdict and remanded the case for a new trial. The Supreme Court of Tennessee granted appeal to address the appropriate standard to be employed when assessing the issue of causation in a medical malpractice informed consent case.4

Under Tennessee law, the plaintiff in an informed consent medical malpractice case has the burden of proving: (1) what a reasonable medical practitioner in the same or similar community would have disclosed to the patient about the risk posed by the prospective treatment; (2) that the defendant departed from the norm; and (3) that this departure caused the plaintiff to suffer harm.5 The issue faced by the Supreme Court of Tennessee was whether an objective, subjective or a hybrid subjective/objective test should be employed when assessing the issue of causation in informed consent cases. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Consent: Tennessee to Follow an Objective Standard for Informed Consent-Ashe V. Radiation Oncology Assocs
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.