South Dakota House Bill HB1228

South Dakota 2022 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/27/22
• Refer: 1/31/22
• Report Pass: 2/22/22
• Engrossed: 2/23/22
• Refer: 2/23/22
• Report Pass: 2/28/22
• Report Pass: 3/2/22
• Report Pass: 3/7/22

Caption

Expand the ability for patients to seek investigational drugs, biological products, or devices.

Impact

If enacted, HB 1228 would amend existing state laws to facilitate access to investigational treatments by establishing clearer definitions for what constitutes an eligible patient and requiring informed consent that provides comprehensive information about the potential risks and outcomes. This change is meant to empower patients and ensure they can make informed decisions about their health care, especially in dire situations where traditional therapies have not proven effective. By expanding patient access to experimental therapies, the bill aims to enhance individual autonomy over health care choices.

Summary

House Bill 1228 aims to expand the ability for patients in South Dakota to access investigational drugs, biological products, or devices that are still under clinical investigation but have completed phase 1 of their trials. The bill defines 'eligible patients' who can seek such treatment as those diagnosed with an advanced or serious illness by their physicians, who have exhausted all approved treatment options and received a recommendation for the investigational treatment. This legislation seeks to provide patients facing terminal conditions more options when conventional treatments fail to offer solutions.

Contention

Despite the positive intentions behind HB 1228, there exists a level of contention surrounding its implications. Opponents of the bill might argue that providing access to investigational treatments could lead to safety concerns, including the use of therapies that have not undergone complete evaluation for efficacy and safety by the FDA. Additionally, there are fears that this bill might pressure patients into pursuing these experimental treatments at the expense of exploring more holistic palliative care options. Conversations among legislators highlight the tension between the desire to offer hope to patients and the responsibility to ensure patient safety and public health.