Senate adopts substituted medical‑liability framework that narrows prior immunity proposal

Senators on Feb. 23 adopted a first substitute to Senate Bill 171 that removes earlier language construed as a broad immunity for health care providers and replaces it with a structured statutory defense tied to specific procedural safeguards.

Sponsor Senator Cullimore said the substitute responds to stakeholder concerns and lays out clear steps a provider must take before deviating from established medical norms: remain within scope of practice, ensure the proposed therapy has some supporting evidence of benefit, document that potential benefits outweigh known risks, educate the patient about standard alternatives, provide written pre‑treatment notice that the recommended treatment deviates from the norm and obtain the patient’s signed acknowledgement, and document the rationale and the procedure's details in the medical record. The substitute makes this a defense to a breach‑of‑duty claim when those steps are followed, rather than a blanket immunity.

Senator Plumb, speaking from clinical experience, called the substitute “a responsible way” to allow carefully considered departures from standard treatment—particularly in pediatrics, where data are often limited—while protecting patients through disclosure and documentation. Cullimore said the bill also allows an optional patient agreement identifying what could constitute negligence related to the deviation, but the agreement is not required.

Senators asked procedural questions and there was no extended floor amendment debate recorded; sponsor waived summation and moved that the first substitute be read for a third time. The Senate adopted the substitute and proceeded with the bill’s third‑reading process.

Next steps: the substituted SB171 was advanced on the floor and would continue through the legislative calendar (committee referral or further consideration as required by Senate procedure).