Texas House Bill HB2143

Texas 2017 - 85th Regular

Caption

Relating to protection for physician assistants who refuse to engage in certain conduct.

Impact

The implementation of HB 2143 would amend the Occupations Code, introducing a provision (Section 204.210) that directly protects physician assistants from discrimination or retaliation under specified circumstances. This change could enhance the ethical conduct within the medical community by fostering a more supportive environment for physician assistants to voice concerns regarding unethical practices. Furthermore, it establishes a formal mechanism for recourse should a physician assistant face unjust treatment as a result of exercising their rights under the bill.

Summary

House Bill 2143 focuses on the protection of physician assistants who refuse to engage in certain patient care practices that they believe could lead to disciplinary action. The bill is structured to prevent any employer from suspending or retaliating against physician assistants for refusing medical actions that are deemed reportable or violate the standards set forth in the Occupations Code. This legislation is significant in reinforcing the rights of medical professionals to make ethical decisions regarding patient care without fear of repercussion.

Sentiment

Overall, the sentiment surrounding HB 2143 appears to be largely positive, especially among medical professionals who advocate for greater protections within the healthcare system. Supporters of the bill argue that it reinforces the importance of patient care ethics and the right of medical practitioners to refuse participation in questionable medical practices. However, there may be some contention regarding potential misuse of this protection by individuals to avoid accountability, which could lead to differing opinions among stakeholders in the healthcare industry.

Contention

Notable points of contention surrounding the bill include concerns raised about the potential for abuse of the protections offered to physician assistants. Critics might argue that such protections could lead to instances where necessary patient care is compromised due to a physician assistant's refusal based on personal judgment rather than medical standards. The delineation between rightful refusal for ethical reasons and evasion of responsibility is a critical discourse that may arise during discussions on the bill.