Patten suffered from a serious, though not immediately life-threatening, impairment of his circulatory system. Patten's cardiologist recommended a cardiac bypass operation and referred Patten to Dr. Cutter. Cutter did not inform Patten of the 2% risk of death associated with this operation. Cutter defended his decision not to mention the risk statistics to Patten because "Patten was a worrier and it would significantly lessen his chances of would significantly lessen his chances of survival to be worried about the nonsurvival rate." Cutter successfully performed the bypass operation and Patten made a good recovery. However, when Patten learned of the 2% risk of death associated with the operation, he was furious that Cutter had failed to disclose this information to him. If Patten asserts a claim against Cutter based on negligence, will Patten prevail? 
No, if Cutter used his best personal judgment in shielding Patten from the risk statistic.  No, because the operation was successful and Patten suffered no harm.  Yes, if Patten would have refused the operation had he been informed of the risk.  Yes, because a patient must be told the risk factor associated with a surgical procedure in order to give an informed consent. 