Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Prescription Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee amends and approves bill clarifying liability and language on off-label prescriptions
Summary
House Bill 164, addressing the use of off-label prescriptions, was discussed, amended (deletions including a severability clause), and approved by roll-call in committee. The sponsor clarified the bill does not shield malpractice and outlined how the bill would affect prescriptions that can cause abortion.
Members of the Labor, Health & Social Services Committee discussed and amended House Bill 164, which concerns medical prescription uses for off-label purposes. Representative Gary Brown, the sponsor, addressed concerns about liability and abortion-related exemptions before the committee debated and adopted two amendments and approved the bill on a roll-call vote.
Representative Brown told the committee the bill does not exempt physicians from malpractice liability. “If a doctor using off-label prescriptions were to intentionally hurt someone, this bill does not exempt a doctor from malpractice,” he said. Brown also explained how the bill intersects with medications that may cause abortion in pregnant patients and noted clinicians would check pregnancy status before prescribing those medicines where relevant.
Senator Scott moved two amendments: one to delete the language on page 4, line 18, and a second to delete a severability clause on page 5, lines 12–22. Senator Scott explained the severability deletion is a drafting housekeeping item because Title 8 already includes a severability clause; removing duplicate clauses is standard practice. The committee discussed the amendments and adopted them by voice vote.
After further discussion, the committee conducted a roll-call vote on House Bill 164 as amended. The recorded votes included Senator Scott, Senator Simons and Senator Hutchings voting yes; Senator Crump and Chairman Barlow voted no. The clerk announced the result as three yes and two no; the bill passed the committee as amended.
Why it matters: The bill clarifies statutory language about off-label prescription use and exemptions, and the committee’s amendments adjusted drafting details to avoid duplication with existing statutory severability language. The sponsor’s statements clarifying that malpractice liability remains intact were central to committee members’ questions.
Next steps: The bill, as amended, will move to the next stage of the legislative process. Committee members signaled they would continue to review related drafting issues if needed.
