Pennsylvania House Bill HB1254

Pennsylvania 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/17/25
• Refer: 4/17/25

Caption

In health care, further providing for applicability, for definitions, for criminal penalties, for definitions, for orders, bracelets and necklaces, for revocation, for absence of order, bracelet or necklace and for emergency medical services, repealing provisions relating to advisory committee and providing for discontinuance and for Pennsylvania orders for life-sustaining treatment; and making an editorial change.

Impact

The implementation of HB 1254 is expected to significantly impact Pennsylvania's approach to patient care at the end-of-life stage. By establishing a clear, actionable form, the bill aims to reduce confusion among health care providers regarding patients' wishes, especially when transitioning between different care settings. The POLST will help ensure that patients' preferences concerning life-sustaining treatment are documented and respected, addressing previous limitations faced by advance health care directives that may not translate effectively in emergency situations. Additionally, it addresses compliance issues where emergency medical services often have divergent protocols regarding do-not-resuscitate orders.

Summary

House Bill 1254, also known as the Pennsylvania Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST), seeks to amend Title 20 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes regarding health care directives and emergency medical services. The bill introduces a standardized POLST form that translates a patient's medical preferences into actionable orders, applicable across various health care settings. This legislative change aims to streamline the decision-making processes in emergency situations, specifically for patients who are at risk for life-threatening events and wish to have their care preferences honored in critical scenarios.

Sentiment

Overall sentiment toward HB 1254 appears to be positive among health care professionals and advocates who view it as a necessary step towards enhancing patient autonomy and ensuring that health care providers can act in accordance with a patient's wishes. However, there could be concerns from various stakeholders regarding the potential complexity of implementing such a system and ensuring that all parties involved understand the POLST process and requirements. Discussions surrounding patient consent and the definition of appropriate circumstances for applying POLST forms are also critical to garner broad support.

Contention

Despite general support, there are notable points of contention regarding the bill, primarily centered on concerns over patient consent and the potential overreach in designating how emergency medical services handle life-threatening situations. Critics might voice fears that POLST could inadvertently limit choices for patients with chronic conditions who may not view resuscitation as a burden. Moreover, the legal repercussions for health care providers acting under POLST regulations could draw scrutiny concerning the implications for liability and ethical responsibilities.