Canterbury Vs Spence Case Summary

In the medical field, it is extremely important to notify patients of any probability that during a procedure there are a number of things that could affect the outcome. Thus avoiding a case of malpractice or a violation of the HIPAA Act. In the case of Canterbury vs. Spence there was a violation of the HIPAA Act where a doctor did not inform the patient of the potential risks that are involved with a spinal surgery. The patient was told about the surgery but did not ask any further details of the surgery itself nor did the patient ask about the risks that are involved when the doctor did not inform him. As the patient was recovering from his surgery he had an incident where he had fallen when getting out of his hospital bed and was almost paralyzed. There can be many sides to a story but the most important subject of this case is the fact that the patient was not informed of the risks of the surgery nor did he ask for additional information. Any kind of surgery can be invasive and can pose …show more content…
Spence case, both parties were in a lawsuit about informed consent. The physician failed to tell the patient of the risks that can happen while going into surgery and any risks that can happen after the surgery. The patient was told of the surgery but did not ask for any additional information. For my personal choice in this case i would find both sides responsible for some of the factors that has happened in the decision making of the physician and the patient. I believe that if the patient has a well grounded mind then the physician should tell them about all the risks for the precare, the surgery itself, and the postoperative care. All of this information can help to save the hospital from a lawsuit. Also, when the patient is presented with an illness that can be helped with an operation they should always do some research about it. This includes being able to ask additional questions and concerns to the