Opinion ID: 3163349
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Informed Consent Under Massachusetts Law

Text: Massachusetts law recognizes the right of a competent adult to forgo treatment, and the [k]nowing exercise of this right requires knowledge of the available options and the risks attendant on each. Harnish v. Children's Hosp. Med. Ctr., 439 N.E.2d 240, 242 (Mass. 1982). For a plaintiff to prevail on a theory of informed consent, (1) the physician must have a duty to disclose the information at issue to the patient, and (2) the breach of that duty must be causally related to the patient's injury. Halley v. Birbiglia, 458 N.E.2d 710, 715 (Mass. 1983). Under the duty inquiry, (a) a sufficiently close doctor-patient relationship must exist; (b) the information subject to disclosure must be that which the doctor knows or reasonably should know; (c) the information must be of such a nature that the doctor should reasonably recognize that it is material to the patient's decision; and (d) the doctor must fail to disclose the subject information to the patient. -14- Id. In turn, for the causation inquiry, the plaintiff must demonstrate that had the proper information been provided neither he nor a reasonable person in similar circumstances would have undergone the procedure. Harnish, 439 N.E.2d at 244. A physician need only disclose information that is material to an intelligent decision by the patient whether to undergo a proposed procedure. Id. at 243. Materiality is defined as the significance a reasonable person, in what the physician knows or should know is his patient's position, would attach to the disclosed risk or risks in deciding whether to submit or not to submit to surgery or treatment. Id. (internal citation omitted); accord Precourt v. Frederick, 481 N.E.2d 1144, 1146 (Mass. 1985). In addition to encompassing the risks associated with a particular procedure, material information also includes the available alternatives, including their risks and benefits. Harnish, 439 N.E.2d at 243.