HB 3211
Requires the Oregon Health Authority to develop and make available a nonopioid directive form.
Take action
Record your position on this measure.
Sign in to record your position, submit testimony, or contact your legislator.
Sign in to take actionPublic sentiment
Support
50%
Oppose
50%
- Introduced
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Bill overview
This bill requires the Oregon Health Authority to create and make available a ‘nonopioid directive form.’ This form allows individuals to instruct healthcare providers and emergency medical personnel not to administer opioids or prescribe them. The form can be executed by the individual or their representative, and can be revoked by the individual, their representative, or their health care advocate. There are exceptions for emergency situations and intraoperative use, and those who follow the rules will not face liability for failing to administer an opioid to someone with a directive.
Key provisions
- The Oregon Health Authority must develop a nonopioid directive form.
- The form instructs healthcare providers not to administer opioids unless otherwise specified.
- Individuals or their representatives can execute the form.
- The form can be revoked by the individual, their representative, or their health care advocate.
- Exceptions exist for emergency situations and intraoperative use.
- Healthcare providers who administer opioids to individuals with directives are required to provide information on substance use disorder treatment.
- Certain healthcare providers, facilities, and employees are exempt from liability for failing to administer opioids to those with directives.
- Rules must be adopted to implement the directive form, including recording, revocation, and confidentiality procedures.
Who is affected
- Healthcare providers
- Emergency medical services providers
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
Primary sponsors
Emerson Levy
Cosponsors
Arguments in favor
Reasons to support this legislation.
Supporters of the proposed policy emphasize the need for greater patient autonomy in managing their own pain treatment, particularly with regards to opioid administration. They argue that a non-opioid directive form would empower patients to make informed decisions about their care, reducing the risk of misuse and promoting the use of alternative treatments. By providing healthcare providers with clear guidance on patients' preferences, this policy aims to improve patient outcomes and reduce the burden on the healthcare system. Proponents also highlight the potential for increased transparency and accountability in pain management, allowing for more effective allocation of resources and better care coordination.
Source: Testimony Summaries
Arguments opposed
Reasons to oppose this legislation.
Opponents of the proposed policy express concerns that it may not adequately respect patient autonomy, particularly for those who are unable to communicate their refusal of opioid prescriptions due to cognitive or communication impairments. They argue that the use of EDIE system to convey a non-opioid directive form may not be sufficient to ensure that patients' wishes are accurately conveyed to healthcare providers, and instead suggest alternative measures such as explicit patient consent forms or more comprehensive assessment tools to determine a patient's capacity to make informed decisions about their care. Some opponents also worry that the policy may inadvertently lead to over-reliance on opioid prescriptions for acute pain management, potentially undermining efforts to address the root causes of addiction and overdose epidemics.