Arizona 2022 Regular Session

Arizona Senate Bill SB1393

Introduced
1/26/22  
Report Pass
2/9/22  
Report Pass
2/14/22  

Caption

Refusing treatment; right; requirements.

Impact

Passing SB1393 would amend the Arizona Revised Statutes, instituting clearer guidelines about how healthcare facilities manage patient treatment refusals, particularly concerning COVID-19. The bill underscores the importance of patient autonomy, offering legal protections that could change how hospitals engage with patients who refuse recommended treatments. Furthermore, it would enable patients and their families to leave hospitals freely and seek court intervention if their rights to refuse treatment or to leave are not respected, thus reinforcing patient rights in medical care settings.

Summary

Senate Bill 1393 seeks to affirm and elaborate on the right of patients to refuse treatment related to COVID-19 and its variants. The legislation stipulates that hospitals cannot impose any treatment or vaccination for COVID-19 if a patient declines such options. Instead, healthcare providers are mandated to counsel patients on alternative treatments available to them, thus ensuring that informed consent remains a priority in patient care. The bill introduces specific definitions that highlight the rights of patients and sets forth a framework for their treatment choices within healthcare settings.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB1393 is mixed, reflecting broader national debates on personal freedoms versus public health responsibilities. Proponents of the bill argue that it is a crucial affirmation of individual rights, especially in the wake of heightened government and institutional interventions during the pandemic. On the other hand, critics raise concerns about the potential implications for public health, arguing that the bill could complicate treatment protocols during a public health crisis and may undermine collective efforts to manage infectious diseases effectively. Public opinion on this bill appears divided along ideological lines, as discussions frequently touch on the balance of personal liberty and community safety.

Contention

Notable points of contention revolve around the implications of the right to refuse treatment detailed in SB1393. Critics question whether allowing individuals to refuse treatment for COVID-19 could lead to public health risks, particularly in cases where herd immunity or widespread vaccination is critical. Supporters of the bill counter that it is a fundamental principle of medical ethics that patients have the ultimate authority over their health decisions. Additionally, there are concerns about the practical enforcement of the provisions, particularly regarding how hospitals will be expected to navigate treatment refusals while ensuring compliance with health regulations.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

AZ HB2706

Mental health; intensive treatment orders

AZ SB1113

Court-ordered treatment; enhanced services; appropriation

MI SB0033

Probate: patient advocates; withholding life-sustaining treatment for a patient who is pregnant; allow. Amends secs. 5507 & 5509 of 1998 PA 386 (MCL 700.5507 & 700.5509).

MI SB0822

Probate: patient advocates; withholding life-sustaining treatment for a patient who is pregnant; allow. Amends sec. 5507 of 1998 PA 386 (MCL 700.5507).

HI SB17

Relating To Medical Informed Consent.

HI SB107

Relating To Medical Informed Consent.

HI HB215

Relating To Medical Informed Consent.

HI HB138

Relating To Medical Informed Consent.