Lawyers must inform clients promptly about matters requiring informed consent.

Let me set the scene: you’re a lawyer and your client is weighing a big decision. There are risks, there are trade-offs, and there are potential conflicts of interest. The client needs to understand what’s at stake so they can give truly informed consent. So, when must you tell them about matters that require that consent? The answer, simple and practical, is: promptly, as required.

Let’s unpack what that really means, because this isn’t just about ticking a box. It’s about the heartbeat of the attorney-client relationship: clear, timely, candid communication.

What “informed consent” really means in law (and why timing matters)

Informed consent isn’t a one-page form you sign and forget. It’s a two-way conversation. The client should understand, in plain language, what choosing one path over another could cost, what the risks are, and what options exist. It’s not enough to say, “Here’s what I think you should do.” The client has a right to understand the alternatives, the possible outcomes, and the practical impact on their life and case.

The Model Rules—where the duty lives

The Model Rules of Professional Conduct, particularly Rule 1.4 on communication, frame this duty in practical terms. Rule 1.4 requires lawyers to reasonably consult with their clients about the means to accomplish the client’s objectives and to keep them reasonably informed about the status of the matter. When it comes to matters that require informed consent—like conflicts of interest, significant decisions, or material risks—you’re looking at timely, clear notice that lets the client participate meaningfully.

Rule 1.7 (conflicts of interest) is especially relevant. If a conflict might affect the client’s decision, you don’t wait until a crisis to bring it up. You obtain informed consent after giving enough information to weigh the pros and cons. The rule isn’t about delaying communication; it’s about ensuring the client can weigh real choices with all the necessary facts.

So, the takeaway isn’t a niche ethical footnote. It’s a practical habit: inform promptly, in language the client can actually understand, and give them a real chance to participate in the decision.

What “promptly” looks like in the real world

Promptness isn’t a stopwatch, but it’s measurable. Here are the kinds of moments that typically call for timely disclosure:

• Conflicts of interest: If a new or potential conflict emerges that could influence the client’s choices, flag it early. Explain the nature of the conflict, why it matters, and what options the client has (including waivers, if appropriate).

• Material risks and consequences: When a decision carries substantial risk or significant consequences—financial, criminal, or personal—you want the client to know about those implications before they commit.

• Alternatives: If there are different routes to achieve the client’s objectives, outline them with their respective risks, costs, and chances of success.

• Changes in strategy: If your approach to the case changes in a way that could alter the client’s consent, inform the client promptly and obtain updated consent as needed.

In practice, that often means saying: “Here’s what this means for you, here are the options, and here’s what I recommend if you want to proceed this way.” It’s not enough to send a memo at the end of the week; it needs to happen when the decision point is on the horizon, so the client can ask questions, seek clarity, and decide with confidence.

What counts as “adequate” informing

Adequacy isn’t about bombarding a client with legal jargon. It’s about clarity, relevance, and sufficiency. Some tips to hit that mark:

• Use plain language: replace “material adverse effect” with “this could mean you lose X or face Y.” If a term is technical, add a quick, plain-language gloss.

• Be concrete: give real scenarios. “If you choose option A, you might pay $X and risk Z.” Vague statements invite doubt.

• Check comprehension: ask, “Do you understand?” or “Would you like me to explain that another way?” A quick check prevents later misunderstandings.

• Document understanding: a short note or written summary of the discussion helps both sides. It doesn’t have to be formal—an emailed recap can do the job.

• Invite questions: encourage the client to voice concerns or confusion. A client who speaks up is a client who’s truly informed.

A few common traps (and how to avoid them)

• Waiting until the end: If you hold off until conclusions are clear or the case is nearly decided, the client may be blindsided by consequences they couldn’t assess early. That’s not just poor form; it can backfire ethically and practically.

• Waiting on a request: If you only speak up when the client asks, you’re putting the burden on them to know what to ask. That’s unfair and unsafe. Proactive disclosure is the norm.

• Jargon heavy explanations: Legal speak is powerful, but it’s not always intelligible to a non-lawyer. The goal is understanding, not impressing anyone with Latin terms.

• One-size-fits-all notices: Every client is different. Some want extra detail; others prefer concise, bullet-point summaries. Tailor your communication to the client’s needs and preferences.

Practical tips for lawyers (keep this simple, effective, and consistent)

• Start with a quick read of the client’s goals and risk tolerance. Align your explanations to what matters most to them.

• Bring up informed consent early in pivotal moments. When a new risk or conflict arises, say it plainly and explain why it matters.

• Use multiple channels: a mix of in-person conversations, followed by a written summary (or email), can reinforce understanding and provide a reference point.

• Use checklists for major decision points. A short script can help ensure you cover the same ground with every client.

• Encourage questions and document the client’s responses and preferences. This isn’t about creating more paperwork; it’s about protecting the client’s rights and the lawyer’s obligations.

Real-world flavor: a quick mental model you can carry into every meeting

Think of informed consent as a two-way street, with a clear signpost at the intersection: “Here are the options. Here are the risks. Here’s what I recommend. Do you understand?” If the client says “Yes, I understand,” you’ve probably done your job well. If they say, “I need more time,” you give them the space—and you come back with more explanation, not a rehash of the same points.

A useful analogy: navigating with a map

Imagine you’re guiding a client through a city you both want to reach. You don’t hand them a maze and say, “Figure it out.” You pull up the map, point to each route, explain the tolls, the time, the likelihood of traffic, and the best detours. The client then chooses the route with your counsel, and you continue to monitor and adjust as you go. Informed consent works the same way: it’s a collaborative map, updated as the terrain shifts.

Why this matters beyond the courtroom

Prompt, clear informing isn’t just about ticking ethical boxes. It’s about respect, trust, and a functioning attorney-client partnership. When clients feel informed, they are more engaged, more likely to ask questions early, and more likely to act in ways that align with their goals. That clarity can prevent little miscommunications from ballooning into big, costly problems later on.

A quick note on sources and authority you can rely on

If you want to dig deeper, the backbone is the Model Rules themselves, especially Rule 1.4 on communication and Rule 1.7 on conflicts. State ethics opinions often illuminate how this works in practice, showing how courts and bars interpret timely disclosure in real cases. For a practical reference, many firms lean on the American Bar Association’s resources and their summaries of how informed consent operates in complex matters.

Final thoughts: timing is trust

Promptly informing a client about matters requiring informed consent isn’t just a rule to follow—it’s a discipline that keeps the relationship honest and productive. It helps the client feel respected, prepared, and part of the process. It reduces surprises, minimizes risk, and keeps a case moving on solid footing.

So, when you face a moment that calls for informed consent, picture that intersection again: options on the map, risks outlined, the client’s goals in focus, you at the guidepost ready to explain. And you do it now, clearly, compassionately, and with a steady eye on what matters most—the client’s right to understand and decide.

If you’re curious about where these principles land in practice, the Model Rules are the compass. Use them as your reference point, and let your communication do the heavy lifting: keep it plain, timely, and truly collaborative. That’s how informed consent becomes not a hurdle to clear, but a hallmark of good advocacy.