House Judiciary panel backs removing mandatory on-site cremation view by medical examiners

Senate Bill 146 would remove the statutory requirement that a deputy or chief medical examiner physically view a decedent before issuing a cremation certificate, the prime sponsor told the House Judiciary Committee.

Sen. Sue Prentiss, the bill’s prime sponsor, told the panel the requirement is an outdated, low-yield step in New Hampshire’s death-review system: “What this bill does is it removes the requirement for the certification of a for cremation. It removes requirement for cremation certificate.” She said death certificates already capture the information needed to determine whether the medical examiner’s office should take jurisdiction.

The bill’s supporters, including Chief Medical Examiner Jenny Duvall, said review of the death certificate and medical records, not a separate physical viewing of the body, is what identifies the small fraction of cases that require further investigation.

“There is value in reviewing the death certificates and making sure that the death was not a death that we should have been notified about,” Duvall said. She told the committee the office does not want to eliminate review of death certificates; the change seeks only to eliminate the separate statutory requirement to travel and perform a physical cremation view.

Supporters described the operational strain the view requirement places on limited staff and the delays families experience as they wait for a deputy medical examiner to travel to a funeral home or hospital. Prentiss said regionalization of medical examiner coverage has reduced the percentage of cases in which a cremation view changes the outcome to “less than 1 percent” of cremation certifications.

Committee members pressed for detail on identification, timing and safeguards. Rep. McFarland asked whether eliminating the view could weaken identity verification; Prentiss and Duvall said identification normally occurs earlier in the chain — at the hospital or when a funeral director receives the decedent — and that statutory procedures authorize funeral directors to proceed when no next of kin can be located. Duvall added that if identification were in question, the case would typically fall under the medical examiner’s jurisdiction automatically.

Members also asked about timing and whether other statutory time limits in current law would change; Prentiss said all other protections would remain, including any statutory delays already required for cremation, and the proposal would only remove the separate physical-view requirement.

Fiscal and operational impacts were discussed. Witnesses said the department would realize savings from reduced travel time and could redeploy deputy medical examiners to other work, such as responding to homicides and unexpected deaths. Committee members expressed concern that a savings projection could translate to future staffing reductions but heard that regional demand for medico-legal death work remains high.

The committee later voted in executive session to recommend passage. Representative Smith moved an “ought to pass” recommendation for SB 146; the motion carried on the committee roll call by a margin announced as 10–6 in executive session.

Why it matters: The bill would change a routine part of the state’s death-review process that affects families waiting for disposition of remains and reallocates limited examiner resources to higher-priority forensic cases. The committee’s recommendation advances the measure to the next stage of the legislative process.

Votes at a glance: Executive session recommendation — motion: “Ought to pass” (moved by Rep. Smith; seconded by Rep. Mannos). Tally announced in committee: 10 yes, 6 no (roll-call recorded during executive session).