Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pharmacy Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pharmacists, hospitals and students warn committee that HB 12 could undermine safety checks on off‑label prescriptions
Summary
Testimony on House Bill 12 drew broad opposition from hospital physicians, pharmacists, pharmacy students and associations who said the bill would limit pharmacists’ professional judgment, conflict with Ohio pharmacy law and billing practice, and risk patient safety; proponents framed the bill as expanding access to off‑label medicines.
Committee members heard extended, often emotional testimony on House Bill 12, which would change the legal treatment of off‑label prescribing and the pharmacist’s role in accepting or refusing prescriptions.
Dr. Adam Mezoff (pediatric gastroenterologist, Dayton Children’s) warned that HB 12 could let a prescriber unfamiliar with a patient override the interdisciplinary team and undermine checks that protect pediatric patients’ safety. He said the bill’s restrictions on changing another provider’s orders outside emergencies could hamper standard hospital workflows and patient safety reviews: “This could include a dentist prescribing cardiac medications for a 3 year old in our pediatric intensive care unit,” he said, describing risks from providers with limited pediatric expertise.
Pharmacists and pharmacy organizations strongly opposed the bill. Professor Britney Bates, a practicing pharmacist and faculty member, said HB 12 would “remove pharmacists as that critical safety checkpoint,” and described practical conflicts with hospital billing systems and pharmacists’ legal duty to exercise judgment when dispensing. David Burke, executive director of the Ohio Pharmacists Association, warned the measure would enable “rogue” out‑of‑state prescribers to send e‑prescriptions to Ohio pharmacies without an appropriate prescriber‑patient relationship, and cited earlier cases that led to tightened rules around valid prescriber relationships.
Hospital and system pharmacy representatives described clinical examples where pharmacists’ refusal to fill a prescription prevented harm. Joe Marciano of the Ohio Society of Health System Pharmacy said HB 12 would be like removing an emergency brake in patient care, giving examples where he refused to dispense medications that would have risked heart attack or stroke because the prescriber was not available to clarify orders.
Students and trainees also testified. A third‑year pharmacy student said HB 12 ‘‘takes away the pharmacist's right to refuse’’ and could push students and pharmacists to consider leaving the state. Supporters of the bill asserted it would expand patient access to off‑label treatments and protect prescribers’ speech, but opponents across multiple health disciplines urged the committee to reject or substantially amend the bill to preserve pharmacist clinical judgment, clarify liability and reconcile conflicts with existing Ohio administrative code (witnesses cited Ohio pharmacy rules including references to obligations under chapter 4729).
The committee concluded the hearing after additional written testimony was noted on members’ iPads. No committee vote on HB 12 occurred at this session.
