House committee hears bill to shorten driver suspensions for some people with epilepsy

Lansing — The House Health Policy Committee on Tuesday heard testimony on House Bills 4,306 and 4,307, sponsored by Representative Vanderwall and Representative DeBoer, that would allow physician input to reduce the standard six-month license suspension after an epileptic seizure to three months in certain cases and create limited exceptions for special circumstances.

Supporters, including the Epilepsy Foundation of Michigan and clinicians, told the committee the bills would let treating health professionals supply evidence that a person’s seizures are controlled or were caused by a one-time, controllable event — for example a medication change or a nocturnal seizure — and that those patients could safely resume driving sooner. "Driving eligibility decisions should be based on a person's unique medical history, their seizure control, and input from the treating health care practitioner," said Andrea Shottefer, president of the Epilepsy Foundation of Michigan.

Current Michigan practice, witnesses said, generally results in at least a six-month mandatory suspension when a person has an epileptic seizure. Representative Vanderwall told the committee that about 1 percent of Michigan residents have epilepsy; Andrea Shottefer said the Epilepsy Foundation estimates about 109,000 Michiganders live with epilepsy. Proponents argued the bills would reduce unnecessary hardship for people with well‑controlled or situational seizures while keeping public safety in mind.

Dr. Gregory Barclay, a co-founder of the Henry Ford Epilepsy Program, described the bills as a way to "refine this Michigan state driving regulation to strike a balance between protecting patients with epilepsy while keeping the secretary of state in control of the key decision" about fitness to drive. Patient advocates described cases where long suspensions discouraged people from seeking care or from fully cooperating with clinicians because of the risk of losing driving privileges. "The existing laws and landscape often discourage patients ... from seeking necessary treatment out of fear of long license suspensions," said Scott Christoffel, a patient advocate who testified in support.

The Michigan Department of State told the committee it opposes the bills as written. Department legislative liaison David Hanzer said the bills would place seizure reports into a hearings process rather than the department’s existing driver assessment workflow and would therefore remove the department’s ability to take immediate licensing action when a person’s ability to control a vehicle is called into question. Hanzer also said the department supports retaining a six‑month requirement for seizures that result in loss of awareness or control, citing the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s driver fitness medical guidelines and current administrative practice. "We are opposed to the bills as written," Hanzer said.

Committee members asked about safety evidence and administrative processes. A department witness outlined that driver assessment reviews physician statements and can include a vision test, a written test and an on‑road evaluation; the department also noted hearings are available after assessment. Supporters said other states’ experience and some studies show no increase in accidents when suspensions are shortened in constrained, clinically reviewed cases, and they emphasized physician judgment.

No committee vote on the bills occurred during the hearing. Witnesses on both sides said they look forward to continued discussions between the Epilepsy Foundation, clinicians, the Department of State and bill sponsors to reconcile safety, administrative process and access concerns.