Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

Obtaining Patient Consent

Client Alert

Patients have autonomy to choose what can and cannot be done to their bodies. Therefore, informed consent is required before any treatments or procedures commence. This is a stark contrast to the previously recognized paternalistic approach, which relies solely on the decision-making of the provider.

However, in order for patients to really choose whether or not to submit themselves to a particular healthcare service, they must actually understand what the service is. Therefore, patient consent should help the patient understand the risks and benefits, as well as any alternative treatment options.

Obtaining Consent

Merely having a patient sign an informed consent is not enough for a patient to consent. Rather, providers should have an active dialogue with patients, which starts with explaining a diagnosis, the proposed treatment including its benefits and risks, and any alternative treatment options and their benefits and risks. Providers should allow patients to ask any clarifying questions they may have. Only after this dialogue can a signed consent be obtained.

While some states recognize verbal consents as valid, others require that patients sign an authorization form to show that consent was actually obtained.

Capacity to Consent

Even if a provider engages in a dialogue with a patient clearly laying out the patient’s diagnosis, treatment options, and benefits and risks, some patients still cannot consent due to lack of capacity. If a patient cannot understand or appreciate the benefits, risks, and alternatives, or cannot demonstrate reasoning in their decision-making, the patient likely does not have capacity to give a valid informed consent. One way to determine whether a patient has capacity is to have the patient restate in their own words what they understood about the dialogue with their provider.

Further, while minor patients may seem to have capacity, they are incapable of providing informed consent (although there are some exceptions in states where the minor is emancipated or is being treated for specific illnesses, such as sexually transmitted diseases). Therefore, consent to treat minors will generally require a parent or guardian’s signature. 

Penalties

Failure to adequately obtain informed consent may result in consequences, including but not limited to medical malpractice lawsuits, loss of hospital privileges, or removal from preferred provider lists.

If you have any questions regarding patient consent in general, or whether your current process for obtaining informed consent is compliant with applicable state and/or federal law, please don’t hesitate to contact BMD Health Law Group Member Jeana M. Singleton at jmsingleton@bmdllc.com or 330-253-2001, or BMD Attorney Rachel Stermer at rcstermer@bmdllc.com or 330-253-2019.  


January 2025 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Brings Notable Changes to HIPAA Security Rule

In January 2025, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services proposed amendments to the HIPAA Security Rule, aiming to enhance cybersecurity for covered entities (CEs) and business associates (BAs). Key changes include mandatory compliance audits, workforce training, vulnerability scans, and risk assessments. Comments on the proposed rule are due by March 7, 2025.

Corporate Transparency Act Effective Again

The federal judiciary has issued multiple rulings on the enforceability of the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA), which took effect on January 1, 2024. Previously, enforcement was halted nationwide due to litigation in Smith v. U.S. Department of the Treasury. However, on February 18th, the court lifted the stay, reinstating the CTA’s reporting requirements. Non-exempt entities now have until March 21, 2025, to comply. Businesses should act promptly to avoid civil penalties of $591 per day and potential criminal liability.

Status Update: Physician Noncompete Agreements in Ohio

Noncompete agreements remain enforceable in Ohio if they meet specific legal requirements. While the AMA and FTC have challenged these restrictions, courts continue to uphold reasonable noncompete provisions for physicians. Recent cases, like MetroHealth System v. Khandelwal, highlight how courts may modify overly restrictive agreements to balance employer interests with patient care. With ongoing legal challenges to the FTC’s proposed ban, Ohio physicians should consult a healthcare attorney before signing or challenging a noncompete agreement.

Immigration Orders and Their Economic Impact on Small Business: Insights from Attorney and Former Immigration Judge Rob Ratliff

President Trump's recent executive orders, targeting immigration policies, could significantly impact small businesses in Ohio, particularly those owned by undocumented immigrants. With stricter visa vetting, halted refugee admissions, and potential deportations, these businesses face uncertainty, workforce disruption, and closures. Ohio's immigrant-owned businesses, especially in food services and transportation, contribute billions to the state economy, and any disruption could result in economic ripple effects.

Corporate Transparency Act Ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court

The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled on the enforceability of the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA), lifting an injunction previously imposed by the Fifth Circuit. However, a separate nationwide injunction remains in effect, meaning businesses are still not required to comply with the CTA’s reporting requirements. FinCEN continues to accept voluntary reporting while enforcement remains paused.