Latest news with #HouseBill1224
Yahoo
29-04-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Oklahoma policies are supposed to help us thrive, not make us feel unwelcome
Every day, my work involves helping Oklahoma businesses grow and thrive. Over and over, the people who own and run corporations of all sizes ― not to mention nonprofits ― tell me they face the same concern: difficulty hiring and retaining talented workers at all levels. We know this problem exists statewide, because we also hear about it from chambers of commerce, economists, educators and elected officials. Often the proposed solutions involve reforming or updating the education system, or changing how the state raises revenue. The folks I talk to agree those are all important factors. But they also see a bigger issue: State policy can make some people feel unwelcome and unsafe. For example, one leader told me they lost a key employee in a high-level leadership role because the employee worried she and her family would not be able to access the medical care they needed if they remained in Oklahoma. One bill under consideration this session, House Bill 1224, would make things even worse. Opinion: I nearly died giving birth. A new Oklahoma bill could've prevented my care This bill, framed as a protection for 'conscience rights' in health care, will have consequences that stretch far beyond hospitals and doctor's offices. It creates an environment where individuals and institutions can legally decline procedures based on personal beliefs, opening the door to discrimination against women, people of different religious backgrounds and potentially anyone who doesn't align with the providers 'morals.' In fact, the bill is so vague that it could even allow someone to deny a vaccine, a blood transfusion or any other medical care. Despite Oklahoma's many advantages, high-talent people choosing between here and somewhere else may decide to go to a state where they can be themselves ― without facing judgment or discrimination by anyone in or near the health care field. Opinion: We're jeopardizing our state's future unless we improve education Every Oklahoman should have the right to choose their own religion, or lack thereof, and practice it freely, as long as it doesn't harm others. A bill that removes medical decisions from the doctor and patient ― giving power to insurance companies, administrators and even office staff ― is morally wrong. It's also bad for business, because it drives away the best and the brightest. If Oklahoma becomes known as a place where basic medical services are uncertain, and where entire groups of people may be turned away, we will struggle to keep and attract the skilled workforce our economy needs. Workforce development is complicated, and it's difficult. HB 1224 would make it harder than it needs to be. Please ask your state senator to vote no on this bill, which harms our ability to grow. Alexandra Towler-Bliss is the Founding Attorney of Culture Connection Law. This article originally appeared on Oklahoman: OK health care policy is bad for business, hurts workforce | Opinion
Yahoo
04-03-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Despite physician opposition, lawmakers OK bill allowing denial of care for ‘moral' reasons
A bill authored by Rep. Kevin West, R-Moore, that would allow health care providers to refuse some services if they have moral or religious objections can now be heard on the House floor. West is pictured at the Oklahoma Capitol on Oct. 3, 2023. (Photo by Kyle Phillips/For Oklahoma Voice) OKLAHOMA CITY — Amid concerns that it could harm patients, lawmakers narrowly advanced a bill that would allow health care providers to refuse to offer specific procedures or care based on moral, religious or conscientious beliefs. House Bill 1224, authored by Rep. Kevin West, R-Moore, moved through the Health and Human Services Oversight Committee Monday with a 7-6 vote with bipartisan opposition. Around 30 health care providers from around the state gathered at the Capitol and filled the committee meeting to advocate against the bill. They said they were disappointed by the outcome of the vote. The legislation, which West said has been successful in a handful of states, could allow a physician, or an entire hospital, to choose not to offer procedures that conflict with personal beliefs. This excludes emergency care, although the bill does not define the parameters that create that situation. No specific procedures or types of care are outlined in the bill, meaning a health care provider, institution or payor could choose to stop offering STD testing, blood transfusions or elective procedures. Rep. Trish Ranson, D-Stillwater, asked West if his legislation could allow a pharmacist, or in theory an entire pharmacy, to choose not to provide birth control to their patients if it conflicted with their religious beliefs. West said it could if they were refusing to provide it to every patient, not just a select few. He said he thinks his legislation 'falls exactly in line' with the American Medical Association code of ethics. While one principle does allow physicians, except in emergencies, to 'be free to choose whom to serve, with whom to associate, and the environment in which to provide medical care,' the code also asks physicians to 'support access to medical care for all people' and 'regard responsibility to the patient as paramount.' House Minority Leader Cyndi Munson, D-Oklahoma City said continuing to legislate and 'criminalize' the physicians and providers in the state will not encourage them to stay and will instead push them out of state when Oklahoma already has some of the poorest health care outcomes in the country. 'We just had a conversation last week about the lack of maternal or the amount of maternal health care deserts in the state, and we know that most of what we're talking about here is abortion, gender-affirming care, those types of procedures and services,' she said. 'And so where will Oklahomans go, even if it's just a handful of people who need care, if there's truly no access, if people decide to take this law and say, 'I'm not going to provide a procedure or service because it goes against my conscience?' Where will Oklahomans go?' West said Oklahomans could find care with another provider or institution who was choosing to offer the care they were seeking. He argued the legislation had attracted providers in states where it had become law, but said no data or survey evidence was available to support this claim. The Republican also ran this legislation in 2024, and while it passed through the House, it died in the Senate. A similar measure in the Senate died in committee Monday, Munson said. 'I would just say that in rebuttal, this will not deny services to just 'anyone,' and what we've seen in other states are that medical professionals migrate toward this type of legislation,' West said. He said he had not spoken with health care providers in the state about his legislation. Dr. Angela Hawkins, the chair of the Oklahoma section of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, said she was disappointed by the vote. 'I think contrary to (West's) statement that physicians welcome this bill, they don't, and the debate discussing how it will affect patients is true,' she said. 'It will limit care for some patients, and not just in relation to abortion or gender-affirming care. You have people who will have decreased access to contraception, even decreased access potentially to mental health services.' Hawkins was at the Capitol as part of an advocacy day with physicians and residents from across the state, including Tulsa, Tahlequah and Oklahoma City. 'We have health care deserts all over the state who have one or two physicians,' she said. 'So to say that they can go and see another physician is not true for everyone. They don't have access to a multitude of places they can go for care or treatment that they need, that that particular physician or pharmacist or hospital system may not agree with.' The bill is eligible to be heard on the floor of the Oklahoma House. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
