What legal risk does a physician face when performing a treatment without informed consent?

When a physician performs a treatment without obtaining informed consent from the patient, the primary legal risk involved is assault and battery. Informed consent is a fundamental ethical and legal requirement in medical practice, which ensures that patients are fully aware of and agree to the risks, benefits, and alternatives of a proposed treatment. When this consent is not obtained, the patient may perceive the treatment as an unauthorized invasion of their personal rights, leading to a claim of assault and battery.

Assault refers to the act of creating apprehension of harmful or offensive contact, while battery is the actual harmful or offensive touching of another person. In the context of healthcare, when a physician administers treatment without consent, it can be viewed as either an offensive contact or an act that violates the patient’s autonomy, resulting in a legal claim.

Other options may relate to various legal aspects of medical practice, but they do not specifically capture the implications of performing a procedure without consent in the same way. Negligence typically involves a failure to meet a standard of care, while malpractice covers a broader range of medical errors or failures. Fraud pertains to deceit for financial gain and would not directly apply to the issue of informed consent in a treatment scenario. Hence, the most direct legal risk associated with