---
title: "Compare a consent form with the risks the notes record as discussed"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/health-and-medical-law/compare-a-consent-form-with-the-risks-the-notes-record-as-discussed"
type: "task"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A32-MN20261023-2"
practice_area: "Health & Medical Law"
tier: "yellow"
lawyer_review: "required"
last_reviewed: "2026-10-25"
---

# Compare a consent form with the risks the notes record as discussed

> From the consent form and the consultation notes the lawyer has selected, make a table with one row per risk named in either document, recording whether the form names the risk, whether the notes record that it was…

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/health-and-medical-law/compare-a-consent-form-with-the-risks-the-notes-record-as-discussed  
Last reviewed: 2026-10-25

Site index for agents: https://ailawframework.com/llms.txt

## Key facts

| Fact | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Practice area | [Health & Medical Law](https://ailawframework.com/practice/health-and-medical-law.md) |
| Human involvement | Yellow: Lawyer and AI draft together |
| How AI is used | From the consent form and the consultation notes the lawyer has selected, make a table with one row per risk named in either document, recording whether the form names the risk, whether the notes record that it was discussed, and the page, and adding a row where the notes record a discussion the form does not name. Do not decide that a risk was material or that a warning was adequate. |
| What the lawyer must review | The lawyer decides which risks were material and whether the warning was adequate. A signature on a form is not, by itself, a record that a risk was discussed. The peer-opinion section does not answer a warning row. See the warning task. Health information stays in a firm-controlled tool, not a public one. |
| Written for / versions | 3 jurisdiction versions below |

## Checking plan

**Source-by-source verification**

Trace relied-on content to the opened sections and check for a difference the table has missed.

- What the AI does: From the consent form and the consultation notes the lawyer has selected, make a table with one row per risk named in either document, recording whether the form names the risk, whether the notes record that it was discussed, and the page, and adding a row where the notes record a discussion the form does not name. Do not decide that a risk was material or that a warning was adequate.
- What the lawyer does: The lawyer decides which risks were material and whether the warning was adequate. A signature on a form is not, by itself, a record that a risk was discussed. The peer-opinion section does not answer a warning row. See the warning task. Health information stays in a firm-controlled tool, not a public one.
- Who reviews: Responsible lawyer with competence in the matter
- Basis: Practical workflow informed by the linked primary sources; the traffic light and working checks are editorial guidance, not a court classification.
- Why: The level reflects what the work is, the consequence of an error, and how much of the output the lawyer must independently re-derive.

## Checks the lawyer makes

1. Cite the page of the form and the page of the notes for every row. Leave the notes cell blank where the notes are silent.
2. Do not treat a signed form as proof that a risk was discussed. That is the lawyer's finding.
3. Do not decide materiality. The sections opened carve warnings out of the peer-opinion test. They do not define which risks had to be mentioned.
4. In Queensland, do not drop a warning row because section 9A(10) says the specialist report need not address it.

## Notes

- These are suggested working checks. Confirm the required checking with the responsible lawyer before work starts; the checking approach does not establish permission to use AI.
- Health information stays in a firm-controlled tool. Rule 9.1 of the Legal Profession Uniform Law Australian Solicitors' Conduct Rules 2015, as described by the Victorian Legal Services Board and Commissioner, and APP 11, apply. The lawyer decides whether any loss is notifiable under the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth).
- No judgment defining a material risk was opened for this task. The lawyer applies the warning test.

## Sources

- [Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic) s 60](https://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/wa1958111/s60.html) (checked 2026-10-23)
- [Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) s 5P](https://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/cla2002161/s5p.html) (checked 2026-10-23)
- [Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) s 22(5)](https://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/qld/consol_act/cla2003161/s22.html) (checked 2026-10-23)
- [Personal Injuries Proceedings Act 2002 (Qld) s 9A(10)](https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/qld/consol_act/pipa2002314/s9a.html) (checked 2026-10-23)

## Jurisdiction versions

| Jurisdiction | Level |
| --- | --- |
| [New South Wales](https://ailawframework.com/practice/health-and-medical-law/compare-a-consent-form-with-the-risks-the-notes-record-as-discussed/new-south-wales.md) | Yellow |
| [Victoria](https://ailawframework.com/practice/health-and-medical-law/compare-a-consent-form-with-the-risks-the-notes-record-as-discussed/victoria.md) | Yellow |
| [Queensland](https://ailawframework.com/practice/health-and-medical-law/compare-a-consent-form-with-the-risks-the-notes-record-as-discussed/queensland.md) | Yellow |

*Practice guidance for planning and review. Confirm current primary sources and the requirements of the actual matter. This is general information, not legal advice.*