Doctors Concerned Florida Opioids Bills Would Go Too Far
Legislation aimed at fighting opioid abuse in Florida has raised concerns among doctors over provisions to impose limits as short as three days for prescriptions of the potentially addictive painkillers.
February 05, 2018 at 02:50 PM
4 minute read
Legislation aimed at fighting opioid abuse in Florida has raised concerns among doctors over provisions to impose limits as short as three days for prescriptions of the potentially addictive painkillers.
Physicians have mounted strong opposition to provisions being considered by House and Senate committees to limit prescriptions for Schedule II painkillers such as Oxycontin and Fentanyl to three days — or seven days in some cases if a physician documents it as medically necessary.
Doctors have told lawmakers that such limits on prescriptions are not enough for some cases of acute pain. They also argue the limits would go too far in limiting flexibility for practitioners, and would place too much burden on patients — some of whom may have limited access to transportation and limits on their mobility — to renew prescriptions.
Tallahassee orthopedic surgeon Hank Hutchinson told a House Appropriations committee hearing last month that the proposed limits on prescriptions are too arbitrary.
“I don't think any of us as competent physicians would write a prescription that wasn't medically necessary,” he said. “Patients are different. Their pain is different. And we treat them all differently.”
Rep. Jim Boyd of Bradenton said that all parties have been “very open-minded in working toward a solution.”
“We're not trying to tell the doctors and the medical community how to practice,” said Boyd, a Republican who represents an area that had the state's highest per capita death rate in 2016 for fentanyl analogs, which are synthetic opioids similar to fentanyl but more powerful. “They understand it is a huge epidemic.”
Gov. Rick Scott declared the opioid epidemic a public health emergency last May. The Florida Department of Law Enforcement reported a 35 percent increase in opioid-related deaths from 2015 to 2016.
Twenty four states since 2016 have passed legislation that imposes some limits or guidelines on prescribing opioids. Only two — Kentucky and Minnesota — have statutory limits of three or four days.
State Sen. Lizbeth Benacquisto, a Republican from Fort Meyers, said discussions are continuing on allowing extended dosages for major procedures, such as heart surgery and hip replacements.
Florida Orthopedic Society Executive Director Fraser Cobb said he has offered suggestions to both Benacquisto and Boyd, but isn't hopeful about a compromise. Besides transportation and mobility issues, especially with seniors, his organization's concerns are about how pain can be defined in law.
Orthopedic surgeon Brandon Luskin of Boynton Beach echoes the same concerns, saying there isn't any leeway when things are put into law.
“There are guidelines that allow doctors to tailor and modify plans for patients and not be under penalty,” he said. “When you put something into law either you are following it or breaking it.”
Both bills, each of which has one more committee stop before reaching the floor, contain tenants of Scott's proposals. Besides the prescription limits, it includes a revamp of a statewide database to monitor prescriptions and to crack down on unlicensed pain management clinics.
Lauren Schenone, press secretary for Scott, said the governor has met with all parties for their input on the legislation.
“The governor's proposal is based on guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and is applicable only to acute pain, not chronic pain such as cancer and hospice care,” she said.
Physicians were leery at first about requiring use of the state prescriptions database, but most of those have mostly subsided with a proposed revamping of the system that would make it work seamlessly with patient's records. The database would also join 40 other states that have reciprocity agreements, which would prevent patients from doctor shopping for additional prescriptions across state lines.
“I really believe that everyone who has voiced their thoughts and concerns have one goal: to help stem the tide of new addiction,” Benacquisto said.
Joe Reedy reports for the Associated Press.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllShaq Signs $11 Million Settlement to Resolve Astrals Investor Claims
5 minute readBenworth Accused of Predatory Tactics in Foreclosure Dispute as Elderly Defendant's Health Deteriorates
4 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250