Physicians are accustomed to disclosing the risks and benefits of treatment as part of their ethical and legal duty to secure informed consent. Generally, physicians have the freedom to decide how to communicate this information, and to tailor their disclosures to the needs of individual patients. However, in today’s highly politicized climate, some state legislatures are eliminating this opportunity for professional discretion in the fields of sexual and reproductive health – most notably in the contexts of abortion and gender-affirming therapy. Physicians are increasingly being compelled to communicate state-mandated messaging that may be at odds with their professional judgment, violating their ethical duty to secure informed consent by “present[ing] relevant information accurately and sensitively, in keeping with the patient’s preferences for receiving medical information.” (AMA Code of Medical Ethics Opinion 2.1.1: Informed Consent)
While physicians and patient advocates have argued that these targeted disclosure laws are unconstitutional, the First Amendment unfortunately sets few restrictions on the government’s ability to compel physician speech. This presentation discusses the expansion of politically-motivated informed consent laws and identifies opportunities for the medical profession to challenge them.