05/17/2021 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY

        SB  65-LIABILITY CONSULTING HEALTH CARE PROVIDER                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
6:17:18 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN announced that the  final order of business would be                                                               
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 65(JUD),  "An Act relating to immunity for                                                               
consulting   physicians,    podiatrists,   osteopaths,   advanced                                                               
practice registered nurses,  physician assistants, chiropractors,                                                               
dentists, optometrists, and pharmacists."   [Before the committee                                                               
was HCS CSSB 65(HSS).]                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  CLAMAN  referred  to  Mason's   Manual  section  1.2  that                                                               
emphasizes  orderly and  businesslike consideration  of questions                                                               
before  the body  to eliminate  confusion and  waste of  time and                                                               
effort.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN stated that the  bill had been introduced to address                                                               
potential  ambiguity  in Alaska  medical  malpractice  law as  it                                                               
pertains to "curbside consults"  where a medical professional may                                                               
consult   with   another   medical  professional   who   has   no                                                               
doctor/patient   relationship   with    the   patient   receiving                                                               
treatment.   He  referred to  the State  of Minnesota  court case                                                               
Warren   v.   Dinter   had  raised   the   question   whether   a                                                             
doctor/patient  relationship  must  exist  for  liability  to  be                                                               
established  in a  medical  malpractice claim.    He referred  to                                                               
three  Alaska  Supreme  Court  Cases, M.A  v  the  United  States                                                             
(1998), Smith v. Radecke (2010),  and Cornelison v. TIG Insurance                                                           
(2016)  may  have  left   ambiguity  whether  the  doctor/patient                                                               
relationship must  exist in a  malpractice claim, SB 65  seeks to                                                               
remedy that  ambiguity.  He  stated that multiple  amendments may                                                               
have detracted  from the bill sponsor's  intent of the bill.   He                                                               
stated  that  adding  the physician/patient  requirement  to  the                                                               
medical   malpractice  statute,   AS   09.55.540,  would   remove                                                               
ambiguity that  may exist  in court opinions  and in  statute and                                                               
uses  fewer  words.    He  suggested it  would  result  in  fewer                                                               
lawsuits and less confusion among providers and patients.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
6:21:13 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR JESSE  KIEHL, Alaska State  Legislature, stated  that the                                                               
fundamental  purpose of  SB  65 was  elegantly  restated via  the                                                               
proposed  committee  substitute  before  the  committee,  despite                                                               
being a  significantly different approach than  the initial draft                                                               
of SB  65.  He added  that the committee substitute  would remove                                                               
the  question  of whether  a  medical  professional may  be  held                                                               
liable  for  medical  malpractice  outside  of  a  doctor/patient                                                               
relationship and  it would maintain focus  on medical malpractice                                                               
liability.    He  stated  his   appreciation  for  the  committee                                                               
substitute's limitation  to parties to a  malpractice lawsuit and                                                               
would  not  permit non-party  participation.    He expressed  his                                                               
support for the adoption of the committee substitute.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
6:24:38 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SNYDER moved  to adopt  the committee  substitute                                                               
labeled 32-LS0002\R, Fisher, 5/17/21.   There being no objection,                                                               
the work draft was adopted.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
6:26:07 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS  expressed his appreciation  of the                                                               
elegance and precision arrived at  in cooperation with the bill's                                                               
sponsor within the committee substitute.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   SNYDER  stated   that  she   had  observed   the                                                               
deliberation of  SB 65 that had  taken place in the  House Health                                                               
and Social  Services Standing Committee  and lauded  the solution                                                               
put   forth  in   the  committee   substitute,  which   she  also                                                               
characterized as elegant.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KURKA   lauded  the  brevity  of   the  committee                                                               
substitute and asked what  prompted eliminating the consideration                                                               
of  "duty of  care" that  had  been addressed  in the  underlying                                                               
bill.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN reiterated the opening  comments that he had offered                                                               
during the introduction of the committee substitute.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN  shared that the committee  substitute reflected the                                                               
clarity that was required to  address concerns brought by members                                                               
of  the  medical  profession  that  they  could  be  sued  by  an                                                               
individual who is not his/her patient.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
6:30:33 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SNYDER  moved to report  CS for HCS  CSSB 65(HSS),                                                               
Version  ..., out  of committee  with individual  recommendations                                                               
and the  accompanying fiscal  notes.   There being  no objection,                                                               
HCS  CSSB  65(JUD)  was  reported  out  of  the  House  Judiciary                                                               
Standing Committee.