Shinal, M., et ux, Aplts. v. Toms M.D., S.

I respectfully but fervently dissent from the Majority’s holding that a physician’s *457qualified staff cannot aid the physician in fulfilling his duty to obtain a patient’s informed consent. The law simply does not support such a proposition. Thus, the Superior Court properly concluded that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by instructing the jury that, in determining whether Dr. Toms provided Mrs. Shinal with the appropriate information to inform her consent, the jury could consider relevant information communicated to Mrs. Shinal by any qualified person acting as an assistant to Dr.…