Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Right To Try topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Families and physicians urge passage of Ohio 'Right to Try' bill; opponents not represented in hearing
Summary
Supporters of HB12 told the House Health Committee the Jeff, Dave and Angie Patient Right to Try Act would restore physician-decisions and prevent pharmacists or hospital protocols from blocking patient-requested treatments; testimony included multiple emotional accounts of denied off-label or alternative therapies during COVID.
House Bill 12, titled the Jeff, Dave and Angie Patient Right to Try Act, drew a steady stream of proponent testimony in its second hearing before the Ohio House Health Committee. Sponsors and witnesses framed the bill as restoring the doctor-patient relationship by limiting pharmacist refusal to fill prescriptions and ensuring patients can access legal, FDA‑approved medications and off‑label therapies when prescribed by a licensed clinician.
Multiple family members delivered emotional accounts alleging hospitals or pharmacies denied requested treatments during the COVID-19 pandemic. Crystal Bowles said her sister Angie and brother-in-law Dave sought alternate treatments that were denied in hospital settings, and Julie Smith described a long legal fight to obtain ivermectin for her husband Jeff before his condition worsened. "Families in Ohio shouldn't have to pay $14,000, go to court and endure vicious cross examination from a hospital lawyer just to even have a chance at receiving a safe...drug to help their loved one survive," Julie Smith told the committee.
Physician and attorney witnesses argued HB12 would restore pre‑pandemic practice. Attorney Tom Renz said the bill does not eliminate civil liability for recklessness or gross negligence and that it re-centers medical decision-making on physicians and patients. Dr. Jeff Mitchell and hospitalist Dr. Holly Papinec testified that pharmacists' refusal to dispense prescriptions became prevalent during COVID and that HB12 would reinforce established Ohio law and professional responsibilities, while preserving safety checks for life‑threatening contraindications.
Pharmacist witnesses and representatives were present to say HB12 would not alter core safety duties but would restore pharmacists' ability to perform clinical conversations and document decisions; witness Kirsten McKeown said it was not legal pre‑COVID to refuse to fill a prescription under Ohio law. Committee members pressed witnesses on litigation risk, drug shortages, professional liability, and operational questions such as monitoring when off‑label regimens are used. The committee closed the hearing and advised members to review written testimony in the packet.
