Pennsylvania Senate Bill SB730

Pennsylvania 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 5/12/25
• Refer: 5/12/25

Caption

In health care, further providing for applicability, for definitions, for criminal penalties, for emergency medical services, 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.

Impact

The enactment of SB 730 will significantly impact existing state laws by enhancing the legal recognition of POLST forms. This legislation allows personalized medical orders that can be honored across different health care facilities, thereby ensuring that patients’ end-of-life care preferences are respected. Importantly, the bill repeals certain provisions related to advisory committees, indicating a shift toward more direct and simplified regulations surrounding life-sustaining treatment orders.

Summary

Senate Bill 730, introduced in the Pennsylvania General Assembly, amends Title 20 concerning health care by establishing a framework for Pennsylvania Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST). The bill aims to streamline the process for individuals to dictate their health care wishes when they become unable to communicate due to medical conditions. Its provisions cover the applicability, definitions of involved parties, and procedures for revocation, emphasizing the need for clear medical orders that reflect patients' desires across various health care settings.

Sentiment

The sentiment around SB 730 appears to be largely positive among health care advocates, who see it as an important step toward empowering patients to have direct control over their health care decisions. Supporters argue that the bill helps overcome many limitations associated with traditional advance health care directives, providing immediate and actionable directives in emergency situations. However, some concerns were raised regarding the potential implications for vulnerable populations and the challenges of ensuring informed consent.

Contention

Key points of contention in the discussions surrounding SB 730 include the distinction between POLST forms and traditional advance health care directives. Critics worry that this new framework might complicate existing health care regulations and could lead to misunderstandings about patients' wishes, especially among those with chronic conditions. Furthermore, there are discussions about ensuring that health care providers fully understand and comply with POLST orders to prevent any lapses in adhering to patients' expressed end-of-life preferences.