Which statement best describes liability for failure to warn when side effects exist but are listed in the printed insert?

• A. A physician may be liable for failure to warn about risks not disclosed by the patient
• B. The physician has no duty to warn about side effects listed in printed materials
• C. The physician cannot be liable for informed consent
• D. The physician is only liable if the patient suffers actual damages

Answer: (A)

The main idea is that obtaining informed consent requires the physician to disclose material risks to the patient, taking into account what the patient has disclosed about their situation. A printed insert can supplement this, but it does not automatically discharge the duty. The physician must warn about material risks that the patient has not disclosed and that could affect the patient’s decision. So, even if side effects exist and are listed in the printed materials, the physician may still be liable for failing to warn about other risks not disclosed by the patient. The other options are less accurate because printed materials don’t shield the doctor from the duty to inform; informed consent can give rise to liability; and damages considerations do not alone determine liability for failure to warn.