Informed consent is a interesting concept. The idea is that before a doctor performs any invasive procedure upon you, typically surgery, or before you are administered an "experimental" medication, you, the patient, should be aware of all of the potential risks and alternatives.

Add to this that states deal with informed consent differently. In PA a claim for lack of informed consent is a negligence claim added to a case as an additional civil cause of action. In NJ, it has been treated as it was at common law (Jolly olde England) a battery, although this may be changing. Literally, an unwanted or unauthorized touching.

So what does a doctor need to inform you of and when? That's the not so clear part. Generally a doctor must inform a patient of the "material risks" and "alternatives" to the procedure. Note that is not every risk, just those that are "material." "Alternatives" is fairly straightforward and can actually be the option of "doing nothing" instead of a procedure.

So just what is a material risk. Typical lawyer answer: that depends. The standard appears to be that of a reasonable patient. Essentially if a reasonable patient would consider a risk a deal breaker for going ahead with a procedure it is a "material risk" and one the patient should know of --death for example. Whether or not you wanted to know about things like injury to other organs or infection, they are typically included as listed risks in an informed consent form.

So when do you need to be informed? Again, that depends. Ideally, an informed consent discussion should take place with the doctor proposing the procedure during a planning visit. Giving you, the patient, the opportunity to ask questions you may have. This is not always possible where a patient is brought in emergently and is unwilling or unable to provide informed consent for life saving procedures.

The unfortunate middle ground has become throwing a paper at the patient just prior to surgery and telling them they need to sign it or they can't have the surgery. Sometimes this happens after patients have already been administered anesthesia or a sedative. Hardly ideal conditions for giving informed consent for anything.