DeWayne Knight v. Thomas Grossman

Summary

The Seventh Circuit held that prisoners have a Fourteenth Amendment right to informed consent, adopting the Second Circuit's *Pabon* standard: a prisoner must prove (1) deprivation of information a reasonable patient would need, (2) defendant's deliberate indifference to the right to refuse treatment, and (3) that the prisoner would have refused treatment if informed; then the right is balanced against countervailing state interests. The court affirmed summary judgment for the doctor on both the Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claim (no evidence of knowing disregard of serious medical need) and the Fourteenth Amendment claim (prisoner failed to show he would have refused the alternative surgery). The case clarifies that deliberate indifference to informed consent is distinct from deliberate indifference to medical needs, and that mere speculation about refusing treatment is insufficient.

Holdings

1. No reasonable jury could find that Dr. Grossman acted with deliberate indifference; the record does not support a finding that the abrasion arthroplasty or recovery instructions deviated from accepted medical standards, and Knight failed to meet the demanding standard of showing no minimally competent professional would have chosen the same course.
2. Prisoners have a Fourteenth Amendment right to informed consent, but Knight failed to prove that he would have refused the abrasion arthroplasty had he been fully informed, so summary judgment was proper.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Dr. Grossman acted with deliberate indifference to Knight's serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment.
2. Whether Dr. Grossman violated Knight's Fourteenth Amendment due process right to informed consent.

Disposition

affirmed