Site Search
Skip to main content

Patient Consent to Treatment for Podiatrists

Download PDF

Professional Standard and Guidelines Regarding Informed Patient Consent to Treatment for Podiatrists

Professional Standard

Fundamental requirements for valid consent include:

  1. It must be voluntary;
  2. It must be given by a patient who has capacity;
  3. It must be specific as to the treatment; and
  4. It must be informed.

Podiatrists must ensure that consent is obtained from patients before performing an examination or treatment, except where specifically permitted by law.1

The College recognizes that further aspects of consent are dynamic and subject to change. It is the responsibility of podiatrists to keep current with the state of the law on consent.

The College further refers podiatrists to the following guidelines regarding informed patient consent to treatment. Note that these guidelines contain reference to relevant provincial legislation.

Guidelines

  1. A podiatrist should:
  1. consider the risks to the patient, the potential for pain and discomfort, and the invasiveness of the procedure when deciding on the type of consent required;
  2. if relying on implied consent, be certain that the actions of the patient would be interpreted by others as having implied permission for the podiatrist’s actions;
  3. ensure that written consent is obtained before performing a surgical operation;
  4. consider the knowledge and expertise of trainees and staff if delegating the consent procedure; and
  5. exercise professional discretion regarding appropriate timing and circumstances for obtaining the consent.
  1. A podiatrist should determine a patient’s capacity to give consent.
  2. A podiatrist who obtains consent from a substitute decision maker on behalf of a patient must comply with applicable laws3.
  3. A podiatrist must respect the right of a patient to withdraw consent at any time.
  4. In obtaining full and informed consent for procedures requiring consent, a podiatrist should discuss, at a minimum:
  1. the exact nature and the anticipated benefits of the proposed examination or treatment;
  2. reasonable and accepted alternative examinations or treatments that are generally available;
  3. the natural history of the medical condition at issue;
  4. consequences of not undertaking the examination or treatment;
  5. the material risks of the examination or treatment and alternatives, which include:
  1. common risks,
  2. serious risks, even if unlikely, and
  3. risks, that although uncommon, may have particular relevance to the patient4, and
  1. any questions the patient may have;
  1. Exception to the above: A podiatrist is permitted by law to act without the consent of a patient (or substitute decision-maker) when:
  1. authorized to do so by legislation (see examples in footnote [i]); or
  2. an emergency situation exists and certain criteria set out by the courts are met (e.g. the patient would suffer loss of life or irreparable substantial harm [e.g. loss of limb] if not treated expeditiously; the patient is unable to give consent and the substitute decision-maker cannot be contacted in the required timeframe needed to treat; and it can be reasonably presumed that the patient would want to be treated in these circumstances and in this manner [i.e. no wishes expressed to the contrary previously and no other reasons known why patient would refuse treatment]).

[1] Examples are contained in the “Emergency Health Care” section of the Personal Directives Act (S.N.S. 2008, c8. s. 19).  Podiatrists should be familiar with any revisions to this provincial legislation.

2 See Canadian Medical Protective Association, Consent: A Guide for Canadian Physicians, updated June, 2016.

3 Podiatrists should be familiar with the Nova Scotia Personal Directives Act, S.N.S. 2008, c.8 which establishes who has the decision making authority on personal-care issues when the patient is incapable of providing consent. PAs should be familiar with any revisions to this provincial legislation.

4 Material risk is determined by considering the circumstances of each patient and the potential seriousness of the risk to a reasonable person in the circumstances of the patient.

Resources

Canadian Medical Protective Association

Acknowledgements

The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Nova Scotia gratefully acknowledges the Province of Alberta and the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta for permitting sections of the Alberta Health Professions Act: Standards of Practice to be adapted in the preparation of this document.

Document History

First approved by the Council of College of Physicians and Surgeons of Nova Scotia: March 21, 2025

© 2025 College of Physicians and Surgeons of Nova Scotia