Torts
Largey v. Rothman, 110 N.J. 204, 540 A.2d 504 (N.J. 1988)
Study notes for Largey v. Rothman: professor notes, cold call prep, exam angles, and memory aids.
The patient-oriented materiality standard governs informed consent, requiring physicians to disclose information that a reasonable patient would consider significant, with causation determined by what a reasonable patient would have chosen.
In Largey v. Rothman, the Supreme Court of New Jersey addressed the significant issue of informed consent standards within the medical field. The court's decision shifted away from a physician-centered standard of disclosure, which focused on what a reasonable physician would disclose, towards a patient-oriented materiality standard that emphasizes what a reasonable patient would consider important in making healthcare decisions. This emphasis on the patient's perspective highlights the court's intention to empower patients in the decision-making process regarding their health and medical treatment. Furthermore, the court's adoption of an objective test for causation, rather than a subjective inquiry, illustrates the shift toward requiring evidence of what a reasonable patient would have decided in light of fully disclosed information, ensuring a more equitable approach to patient rights in medical contexts.
P.A.C. - Patient Awareness Counts (for patient-oriented materiality standard and objective causation).
| Case | Distinction |
|---|---|
| Canterbury v. Spence | Canterbury v. Spence also discusses informed consent but emphasizes the necessity for patients to understand potential risks rather than explicitly adopt a patient-oriented standard. |
| Schardt v. Smith | Schardt v. Smith focused on a specific risk disclosure requirement rather than addressing the broader implications of the informed consent standard as in Largey v. Rothman. |
| Gordon v. Harris | Gordon v. Harris examined physician liability for failure to disclose specific risks, contrasting with Largey's broad adoption of a patient-focused standard for all significant disclosures. |
The patient-oriented materiality standard enhances patient autonomy and informed decision-making, ensuring that healthcare providers respect the values and concerns of patients when informing them about medical procedures.
Critics may argue that the objective standard for causation could place an unreasonable burden on healthcare providers, making it more difficult for them to navigate the complexities of patient disclosure and consent processes.
Largey v. Rothman may be featured in exams focusing on informed consent, highlighting distinctions between physician and patient-oriented standards, as well as testing knowledge on causation in malpractice claims.