New Hampshire
How Berman v. Allan applies in New Hampshire: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Torts (Medical Malpractice / Informed Consent).
New Hampshire follows the principle of informed consent as articulated in Berman v. Allan, emphasizing the importance of a patient's right to make autonomous medical decisions based on clear and adequate information from medical providers. The courts require that the standard of disclosure aligns with what a reasonable patient would find material in making a treatment decision.
In New Hampshire, a physician must disclose to the patient all material risks associated with a proposed treatment, enabling informed consent to be obtained.
The court affirmed that a physician is liable for failure to inform the patient adequately of risks associated with a procedure, setting a precedent for informed consent standards.
This case reinforced the materiality standard in informed consent, providing that the disclosure must align with what a reasonable patient would wish to know.
The court held that even an omission of a single significant risk could vitiate the patient's consent, emphasizing thorough disclosure.
New Hampshire's approach aligns closely with the federal standard under informed consent but is unique in its emphasis on what a reasonable patient would consider material. While both federal and state standards prioritize patient autonomy, New Hampshire courts have further refined the definition of material disclosure specific to the state's medical practices.
Understanding the principles from Berman v. Allan and their application in New Hampshire is crucial, as informed consent is a common topic on the New Hampshire bar exam.