Informed consent to treatment (IC) is designed to protect patient autonomy and control through disclosures and shared decisions. However, many malpractice claims suggest patients perceive problems with its handling (e.g., information withholding). Moreover, previous studies of IC lack the nuance of discursive perspectives, theoretical grounding, and recognition of IC's sociohistorical context. Drawing on a structurational perspective, which conceives of IC as constituted by contradictory sociohistorical structures (discourse formations) representing different groups' interests in controlling IC, this study examines how the structure representing physicians' interests is (re)produced in practice. Focus group accounts reveal how radiologists-drawing upon interpretive schemes of patients as fearful, ignorant, and easily controlled-discursively and skillfully manipulate IC language and information in engineering patients' decisions.