(1) The following shall be necessary elements of proof that injury resulted from health care in a civil negligence case or arbitration involving the issue of the alleged breach of the duty to secure an informed consent by a patient or his or her representatives against a health care provider:

(a) That the health care provider failed to inform the patient of a material fact or facts relating to the treatment;

(b) That the patient consented to the treatment without being aware of or fully informed of such material fact or facts;

(c) That a reasonably prudent patient under similar circumstances would not have consented to the treatment if informed of such material fact or facts;

(d) That the treatment in question proximately caused injury to the patient.

(2) Under the provisions of this section a fact is defined as or considered to be a material fact, if a reasonably prudent person in the position of the patient or his or her representative would attach significance to it deciding whether or not to submit to the proposed treatment.

(3) Material facts under the provisions of this section which must be established by expert testimony shall be either:

(a) The nature and character of the treatment proposed and administered;

(b) The anticipated results of the treatment proposed and administered;

(c) The recognized possible alternative forms of treatment; or

(d) The recognized serious possible risks, complications, and anticipated benefits involved in the treatment administered and in the recognized possible alternative forms of treatment, including nontreatment.

(4) If a recognized health care emergency exists and the patient does not have the capacity to give an informed consent and/or a person legally authorized to consent on behalf of the patient is not readily available, his or her consent to required treatment will be implied.

Effective date—2021 c 270: See note following RCW 7.70.065.

Severability—1975-'76 2nd ex.s. c 56: See note following RCW 4.16.350.