04/26/2004 08:06 AM Senate JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
April 26, 2004
8:06 a.m.
TAPE(S) 04-42
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Ralph Seekins, Chair
Senator Scott Ogan, Vice Chair
Senator Hollis French
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Gene Therriault
Senator Johnny Ellis
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 388
"An Act relating to the creation of a civil legal services
fund."
MOVED SB 388 OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 188
"An Act relating to the authority of the Department of Natural
Resources to issue citations for certain skiing violations;
relating to establishing a bail schedule for certain skiing
violations and to procedures for issuing a citation for a skiing
violation."
HEARD AND HELD
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 25(JUD)
"An Act relating to health care decisions, including do not
resuscitate orders, anatomical gifts, and mental health
treatment decisions, and to powers of attorney relating to
health care, including anatomical gifts and mental health
treatment decisions; and providing for an effective date."
HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 388
SHORT TITLE: CIVIL LEGAL SERVICES FUND
SPONSOR(s): JUDICIARY BY REQUEST
04/15/04 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/15/04 (S) JUD, FIN
04/26/04 (S) JUD AT 8:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: HB 188
SHORT TITLE: BAIL SCHEDULE FOR SKIING VIOLATION
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) HAWKER
03/12/03 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/12/03 (H) RES, STA
02/25/04 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124
02/25/04 (H) Moved Out of Committee
02/25/04 (H) MINUTE(RES)
02/26/04 (H) RES RPT 5DP 2NR 1AM
02/26/04 (H) DP: HEINZE, LYNN, KERTTULA, MASEK,
02/26/04 (H) DAHLSTROM; NR: STEPOVICH, GUTTENBERG;
02/26/04 (H) AM: GATTO
03/23/04 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 102
03/23/04 (H) Moved Out of Committee
03/23/04 (H) MINUTE(STA)
03/24/04 (H) STA RPT 2DP 1DNP 4NR
03/24/04 (H) DP: COGHILL, WEYHRAUCH; DNP: HOLM;
03/24/04 (H) NR: SEATON, GRUENBERG, LYNN, BERKOWITZ
04/14/04 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
04/14/04 (H) VERSION: HB 188
04/15/04 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/15/04 (S) JUD
04/26/04 (S) JUD AT 8:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: HB 25
SHORT TITLE: HEALTH CARE SERVICES DIRECTIVES
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) WEYHRAUCH
01/21/03 (H) PREFILE RELEASED (1/10/03)
01/21/03 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/21/03 (H) HES, JUD, FIN
02/13/03 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
02/13/03 (H) Heard & Held
02/13/03 (H) MINUTE (HES)
02/27/03 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
02/27/03 (H) Heard & Held
02/27/03 (H) MINUTE (HES)
03/06/03 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
03/06/03 (H) Moved CSHB 25(HES) Out of Committee
03/06/03 (H) MINUTE (HES)
03/10/03 (H) HES RPT CS(HES) NT 7DP
03/10/03 (H) DP: GATTO, WOLF, HEINZE, SEATON,
03/10/03 (H) CISSNA, KAPSNER, WILSON
03/26/03 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/26/03 (H) -- Meeting Canceled --
03/28/03 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/28/03 (H) Heard & Held
03/28/03 (H) MINUTE (JUD)
03/31/03 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/31/03 (H) Moved CSHB 25(JUD) Out of Committee
03/31/03 (H) MINUTE (JUD)
04/07/03 (H) JUD RPT CS(JUD) NT 5DP
04/07/03 (H) DP: SAMUELS, HOLM, GARA, OGG, MCGUIRE
04/07/03 (H) FIN REFERRAL WAIVED
05/06/03 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
05/06/03 (H) VERSION: CSHB 25(JUD)
05/07/03 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
05/07/03 (S) HES, JUD
05/16/03 (S) HES AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
05/16/03 (S) Heard & Held
05/16/03 (S) MINUTE (HES)
03/08/04 (S) HES AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/08/04 (S) Heard & Held
03/08/04 (S) MINUTE (HES)
03/24/04 (S) HES AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/24/04 (S) Heard & Held
03/24/04 (S) MINUTE (HES)
04/02/04 (S) HES AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
04/02/04 (S) Bill Postponed to 04/07/04
04/07/04 (S) HES AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
04/07/04 (S) -- Rescheduled to 5:30 pm 04/07/04 --
04/07/04 (S) HES AT 5:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
04/07/04 (S) -- Rescheduled from 1:30 04/07/04 --
04/14/04 (S) HES AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
04/14/04 (S) Heard & Held
04/14/04 (S) MINUTE (HES)
04/16/04 (S) HES AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
04/16/04 (S) Heard & Held
04/16/04 (S) MINUTE (HES)
04/19/04 (S) HES AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
04/19/04 (S) Moved SCS CSHB 25(HES) Out of Committee
04/19/04 (S) MINUTE (HES)
04/20/04 (S) HES RPT SCS 2DP 3NR SAME TITLE
04/20/04 (S) DP: DYSON, WILKEN;
04/20/04 (S) NR: GUESS, GREEN, DAVIS
04/26/04 (S) JUD AT 8:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
WITNESS REGISTER
Mr. Andy Harrington
Alaska Legal Services
Anchorage, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 388
Mr. Bob Bundy
Alaska Legal Services Board of Directors
Anchorage, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 388
Representative Mike Hawker
Alaska State Capitol
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HB 188
Larry Daniels
General Manager
Alyeska Resort
Girdwood, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Supports HB 188
Dave Wilson
Mountain Manager
Alyeska Resort
Girdwood, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Supports HB 188
Representative Bruce Weyhrauch
Alaska State Capitol
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HB 25
Dr. Marie Wallington
Medical Ethicist
Providence Hospital
Anchorage, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions pertaining to the
implementation of HB 25
Paul Malley
President
Aging with Dignity
Florida
POSITION STATEMENT: Supports HB 25
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 04-52, SIDE A
CHAIR RALPH SEEKINS called the Senate Judiciary Standing
Committee meeting to order at 8:06 a.m. Senators French, Ogan
and Chair Seekins were present. The committee took up SB 388.
SB 388-CIVIL LEGAL SERVICES FUND
CHAIR RALPH SEEKINS, sponsor of SB 388, explained to members
that SB 388 sets up the Civil Legal Services Fund, into which
the legislature may appropriate the punitive damage awards that
it currently deposits into the general fund. He noted that in
Alaska, 50 percent of punitive damage awards go to the state, 50
percent go to the prevailing party. The Civil Legal Services
Fund is to be used to provide legal services to low-income
individuals. He believes providing those services is a
worthwhile goal and one that he supports strongly. Those legal
services are used effectively; clients are not filing frivolous
lawsuits but instead pursue legitimate claims that they could
not otherwise afford to pursue.
SENATOR OGAN asked if an unemployed legislator would qualify for
free legal services and, if so, he was declaring a conflict of
interest.
CHAIR SEEKINS jested if this was Senator Ogan's only job, he
probably would qualify. With no questions from members, he took
public testimony.
MR. ANDY HARRINGTON, representing Alaska Legal Services, thanked
committee members for hearing SB 388 and told them Alaska Legal
Services is a non-profit agency that provides free legal
assistance to low-income people. Alaska Legal Services does not
represent people who are charged with crimes; it handles cases
in which, for example, a tenant might be faced with a loss of
shelter, a working family is faced with a loss of income through
garnished wages, or a domestic violence victim is faced with
further victimization while trying to navigate the legal system.
When a legal defense can be raised on behalf of these clients,
Alaska Legal Services makes a case in court for them. In
addition, Alaska Legal Services has a considerable education
component, which includes a pilot project legal lab where people
learn to do their own legal research and learn court system
procedures. Its website, Alaskalawhealth.org was specifically
designed for that purpose.
MR. HARRINGTON informed members that the court system raised
this idea while working with Alaska Legal Services on the
possibility of establishing a civil filing fee surcharge to
raise revenues. He again thanked members for considering this
measure.
MR. BOB BUNDY, member of the Alaska Legal Services Board of
Directors, told members he has practiced law around Alaska for
32 years. He pointed out that Alaska Legal Services is often put
in the position of arguing against unrepresented people with no
understanding of the law or procedure. Those cases create a
bottleneck in the court. In addition, Alaska Legal Services
gives legal advice to people, which alleviate the need to spend
resources and time engaging in a legal battle that does not need
to be fought. It also provides legal services to people who
cannot afford services that enable them to get through
circumstances in life, such as adoptions, divorces, child
custody disputes, and others that can only be addressed by the
legal system. When those situations are not addressed, they can
turn into gigantic problems later on and are more time consuming
for all involved.
MR. BUNDY pointed out that Alaska Legal Services does a lot to
make sure that people in our society have legal advice and
representation, which helps the entire legal system to function
better. With the squeeze on revenues everywhere, it has become
harder to provide those services, particularly in the Bush. He
concluded:
The bang for the buck is unbelievable. The lawyers at
Legal Services work for much less than any other
lawyers you'll find in the state, especially -
including people that are actually state employees.
These people work for a little bit, they care about
their clients and they just do a real good job. I
think this is a really worthwhile bill if there's some
way to get some money to this group of people to keep
this going on.
SENATOR FRENCH asked how much state funding Alaska Legal
Services receives now and whether he is concerned this bill will
act as a proxy for that funding.
MR. HARRINGTON said Alaska Legal Services received $125,000 for
FY 04 from the state. About 20 years ago, it received $1
million, so its budget has decreased dramatically. In FY 03 it
received $175,000. The House budget contains $125,000 for next
year but that amount was not included in the Senate budget. He
said his "read" of state finances over the next few years is
that funding will become increasingly difficult to get, which
persuades him that it makes sense to have this dedicated program
revenue. He said the bottom line is that Alaska Legal Services
is worried that SB 388 may replace a state appropriation, but
given the difficulties it has had with state appropriations, SB
388 seems to be the better course to pursue.
CHAIR SEEKINS responded:
Andy I appreciate that. I think many members share the
intent, as a good intent, and don't aim for this to
supplant state support but to try to maybe enhance it
would be a better word. Again, it is going to be an
interesting fund because this bill basically says the
legislature may appropriate - it doesn't say that it
shall but it may, so we'll have a way to at least
apply some leverage and some stronger discussion than
just having it get lost somewhere in the subcommittee
discussions.
He then noted with no further participants, public testimony was
closed. The committee took a short at-ease from 8:20 to 8:22
a.m.].
Upon reconvening, SENATOR FRENCH commented that the
representatives from Alaska Legal Services addressed his
concerns.
SENATOR OGAN moved SB 388 with its attached fiscal note from
committee with individual recommendations.
With no objection, CHAIR SEEKINS announced that SB 388 moved
from committee.
HB 188-BAIL SCHEDULE FOR SKIING VIOLATION
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HAWKER, sponsor of HB 188, told members he
introduced this legislation at the request of the downhill ski
industry in Alaska. The purpose of HB 188 is to complete the
implementation of the Alaska Ski Safety Act (ASSA), which was
passed by the Eighteenth Legislature in 1994. He noted that
Representative Kerttula co-sponsored this legislation. Her
father carried the original ASSA.
He explained that in 1994, the fact that Alaskans valued
downhill skiing as a sport and had a great opportunity to
develop winter tourism was recognized. The ski industry was
fairly unregulated but as large ski areas were being developed,
the need to adopt regulations to define the rights and
responsibilities of both the operators and users of ski areas
became apparent. The ASSA attempted to do that and put quite a
few burdens on the operators of ski areas, regarding patrol,
safe ski lifts, etcetera, to make the sport as safe as possible.
While that act recognized the duties of operators, it also
required affirmative duties of skiers by expecting the skier to
know the range of his ability. However, a number of particular
offenses that have presented sufficient danger were not included
in the original act, and the industry has asked that it be able
to fine skiers for those offenses to deter unsafe and
inappropriate behavior. He emphasized that HB 188 does not
change any of the aspects of the ASSA. Its purpose is to clear
up two problems.
He explained the first addition as follows:
The first section really makes a change. It eliminates
this tag line that says...a person...[that] violates a
provision of certain sections is guilty of a
violation. The commissioner of the Department of
Natural Resources shall authorize people to issue
these citations, but another tag line says within a
ski area over which the state has jurisdiction. Now,
that's become an item of some confusion, as we've had
a couple of changes in administration since 1994 and
with people in the Department of Natural Resources,
and the ski industry itself.
As I talk to members of the ski industry, their
interpretation of that original provision was that
that was there to distinguish federal from state
jurisdiction so that the state was not trying to pass
laws or regulations that would be trying to regulate
federal operations, which we could not do. They wanted
to include - within state jurisdiction, it's sort of
like you know, saying, there's the primary law
enforcement over the area - that would include both
areas operated by the state itself as well as private
operations operating within the state in an area
that's under state jurisdiction.
CHAIR SEEKINS clarified that state jurisdiction would apply on
federal property unless otherwise provided.
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER said that is what was at issue: who had
jurisdiction where. He added that this bill enjoys the support
of both the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and the ski
industry and both want to make it very clear that it applies to
any ski area, not only those operated by the State of Alaska.
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER continued:
The second [change] was the original ski safety act in
1994 contemplated that the Supreme Court would
establish a bail forfeiture schedule for those
violations specified in the section referenced in the
bill here, which, in the sponsor statement, I've
attached an addendum to that. These are specific items
in Section 05.45.100 that were identified within the
bill as being those activities that a person could do
that we wanted to discourage with the greatest
possible deterrents. You'll find that in the very end
of the package there is a letter from the Eaglecrest
Ski Area, which summarizes at page 2 the bail schedule
that had been proposed by DNR back in 1994. It
basically moves the schedule of fees for these
violations from $50 to $150 for several of the
violations.
I want to emphasize that none of these violations for
which a bail forfeiture schedule is contemplated have
anything to do with judgmental calls on a skier's
ability to ski. These are not speeding tickets for
skiing too fast. This is not giving the ski patrol the
ability to go out there and essentially be a police
force on the ski slope but these are items that are
very objectively determined - having a collision,
leaving someone injured, skiing in a closed area,
skiing or riding lifts under the influence of drugs
and alcohol, crossing the track of an uphill lift,
using skis without stopping devices - obviously
something could become a missile going downhill, and
skiing in a closed area.
The Supreme Court has also - and in your package are
two letters that are particularly succinct about this,
and their statement was quite simply that the Supreme
Court does not believe there is clear authorization in
the statute to establish the bail schedule. And so
Section 2 gives very clear and succinct direction to
establish the bail forfeiture schedule and, again, the
Supreme Court shall establish by rule or order a
schedule of bail amounts, which may be forfeited
without a court appearance for a violation of c or g.
The third section follows up that point of without a
court appearance - I mean this is not a criminal
activity; this is just something you want to
discourage. The penalty is only - these offenses are
classified as violations, which are punishable only by
a small fine.
The third section of the bill goes to the point of law
where these sort of issues are dealt with and this is
AS 12.25.180 and 190, which are really part of the
arrest and citation section of the Code of Criminal
Procedure where we specifically exempt any citation
issued under the ski safety act from having the
requirement that an individual appear in person should
they forfeit their bail on this. Other areas of
citations where we've got bail schedules in the state
that are similar are motor vehicle citations with a
bail fine schedule, fish and game violations with a
bail schedule, obviously the proposal is to add the
ski safety act. We've also got the parks and
recreational facilities, littering citations and
...also the Boating Safety Act citations. That third
section, again, is specifically saying that when you
issue a citation here, the citation does not have to
have a written promise to appear in court since it's
at best addressed only by a fine if offered.
We do have available today to present both the
Department of Natural Resources and representatives of
the Alaska ski industry, should you wish to query them
any, sir.
8:30 a.m.
SENATOR FRENCH asked if the ski industry could currently be
issuing citations for each of the offenses if it wanted to.
MR. HAWKER said his understanding is that under the existing
structure, the violation schedule is punishable today by a $50
fine. He added that the bill would authorize the Supreme Court
to establish a bail schedule.
SENATOR FRENCH referenced the bail schedule in the Eaglecrest
Ski Area letter and asked if they are suggestions to the Supreme
Court.
MR. HAWKER said that is his understanding and that DNR proposed
that schedule to the Supreme Court in 1994 when the court said
it had no authority to adopt it.
SENATOR FRENCH expressed concern that right now a person could
be cited for a $50 violation and will lose the lift ticket. He
believes that is a severe enough penalty for many of the
offenses.
CHAIR SEEKINS believed the proposed bail schedule contains
ceilings for the fines rather than mandatory amounts. He added
that many fines are suspended upon condition of no recurrence.
He believes the point of the bail schedule is to provide a
meaningful penalty to prevent people from endangering others.
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER felt Chair Seekins' analysis is right on
point and that Commissioner Irwin would support that analysis
also. He pointed out there is particular concern about skiing in
closed areas, therefore the fine needs to be sufficient to
discourage that activity. If an area was closed because of
avalanche danger, that activity could expose a large number of
people to injury.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked about the definition of "peace officer" in
the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER acknowledged that section is confusing
because peace officers are not involved in ski safety act
activities; that act applies to ski operators and DNR. He
explained:
If you notice, it moves into Alaska statute section
12, which is the Code of Criminal Procedure, and this
is generically a section excluding certain citations
from having this mandatory requirement to appear. In
this context the word 'peace officer,' which is
typically - I guess the paragraph is prefaced by...'a
person cited for the crime shall give a written
promise to appear in court by signing at least one
copy of a written citation prepared by the peace
officer'. That is the general rule when, in this
state, someone has committed a crime and is being
cited by a police officer for it.
Then the next paragraph is where it becomes operative
and that is 'the written promise requirement does not
apply to boating citations' and all the rest of these.
The implication that it involves a requirement that a
peace officer issue the citation is...not contemplated
or required under the ski safety act. This is strictly
a violation activity managed by the Department of
Natural Resources and folks designated by the
commissioner to be part of the process, not involving
peace officers.
CHAIR SEEKINS indicated that several people have inquired about
that section and thanked Representative Hawker for the
explanation. He then asked Representative Hawker if his intent
is to create a more serious deterrent for those people who
knowingly put the life and safety of other individuals at stake
through bad practices on ski slopes.
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER said that is correct, within the larger
context of promoting a vibrant downhill ski industry in Alaska.
SENATOR OGAN asked about places like Hatcher Pass where people
ski and snowmachine but there is no operator.
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER answered the definition section of the ski
safety act, which is AS 05.45.200, specifically provides that a
ski area means downhill ski slopes, trails or places under the
control of a downhill ski area operator. A ski area does not
include a cross-country ski trail, even if owned by an operator.
HB 188 does not affect open land that is not commercially
developed as a downhill ski area.
CHAIR SEEKINS agreed with Senator Ogan that people who put other
people's lives in danger on unmanaged slopes should be
penalized.
SENATOR OGAN pointed out that the state does not have the
resources to pay for avalanche forecasting but if he were a park
ranger he would hire an avalanche expert. He felt that modifying
the bill to allow state parks to close, particularly Chugach
State Park, when hazardous conditions exist would be wise. He
pointed out that whenever a rescue team is engaged in a search
after an avalanche, 50 people's lives are put at risk.
CHAIR SEEKINS took public testimony.
MR. LARRY DANIELS, ski area general manager, Alyeska Resort,
stated support for HB 188. He said this legislation simply
completes the 1994 ski safety act as originally contemplated.
The ski safety act has been beneficial over the years as it
specifies both the skiers and operators' responsibilities. HB
188 will provide enforcement power for the ski safety act. He
described some of the violations that occur and the dangers
caused by those violations.
MR. DAVID WILSON, mountain manager, Alyeska Resort, told members
that Alyeska Resort has kept violation records for three years,
which show a decrease in the number of violations cited. Four of
those violations were very serious: collision, jumping from the
chairlift, ticket fraud, and skiing in a closed area. Most
citations are issued for skiing in closed areas. In the 2000-
2001 season, DNR issued five citations; in 2001-2002 it issued
one citation. He emphasized that citations are not issued
arbitrarily. They are used as deterrents.
SENATOR FRENCH asked Mr. Wilson if the resort has the authority
now to issue citations.
MR. WILSON said Alyeska Resort notifies DNR, which issues the
citations.
SENATOR FRENCH remarked that HB 188 would allow the ski area
operator to pick folks to issue citations and asked Mr. Wilson
if Alyeska Resort has discussed that possibility.
MR. DANIELS replied that Alyeska's staff would not directly
issue citations. They would take recommendations to DNR staff,
which would decide whether to issue the citations.
CHAIR SEEKINS affirmed that Senator French's interpretation is
correct in that the bill allows the commissioner of DNR to
authorize individuals to issue citations.
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER reminded members that language is in
current statute.
There being no further participants, CHAIR SEEKINS closed public
testimony.
SENATOR OGAN repeated his belief that the committee should
consider including state park closures in the bill.
CHAIR SEEKINS noted that would require a title change.
SENATOR OGAN said he would only want to make that change with
the sponsor's concurrence.
TAPE 04-52, SIDE B
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER responded that although he feels Senator
Ogan's concern is legitimate, he would prefer to keep the bill
as is. He noted this legislation is specific to organized ski
areas and the ski safety act and he has not even looked into any
other statutes that apply to mechanized sports.
CHAIR SEEKINS cautioned that any legislation that pertains to
mechanized vehicles would entail a great deal of public input so
he would prefer not to burden HB 188 with that discussion at
this late date in the session.
SENATOR FRENCH commented that he feels lukewarm about this bill
if Alyeska only issued six citations in two years. He believes
HB 188 is an attempt to fix something that is not broken.
CHAIR SEEKINS announced he would hold the bill until the entire
committee is present.
HB 25-HEALTH CARE SERVICES DIRECTIVES
REPRESENTATIVE BRUCE WEYHRAUCH, District 4, gave the following
introduction of HB 25.
HB 25 was prefiled in 2002 and it had roughly six
hearings in House Health and Social Services and then
four hearings in House Judiciary. And then over here,
Chair Dyson of the Senate Health and Social Services
Committee held I think, roughly, eight hearings and
it's gone through substantial revision in the Senate
and I owe a great deal of respect and appreciation to
Senator Dyson for what that committee did on this bill
in conjunction with our office.
This bill is a significant piece of legislation in
that it brings together programs that deal with organ
donation, the living will program, the comfort one,
do-not resuscitate provisions of statute, the durable
powers of attorney and advanced directives for health
care decisions. Death is a critical part of life and
we all die. This bill is intended to provide in one
place the information available to people who are
dying and whose families are dying and who want to
plan for their deaths when that time comes.
It's intended to help clarify existing law and to help
bring other good portions of laws throughout the
United States into one law here in Alaska and it's
garnered a great deal of attention from a multitude of
parties that are interested in clarifying the statutes
on these issues and allowing the public who needs to
deal with this in hospitals, hospices - medical
providers, a clear standard to deal with end-of-life
health care decisions.
The bill gathered my interest because of my father who
recently passed away and he had a durable power of
attorney and advanced health care directives but he
didn't advise my mother of it. Therefore, he
languished in a state where he did not want to be for
three years before he actually passed away and when my
mother was advised of the situation she was upset
because he was living the life that he never would
have wanted. If his advanced health care directives
had been simply acted upon, he would have been treated
a lot differently in terms of his medical health care
decisions.
And so this is something that all people can use and,
Mr. Chairman, it is a meaty bill. I want the committee
comfortable with it as the other committees have been
as they passed it out and so what I was planning to do
was step back and let a lot of other people testify
who've had input on this.
SENATOR OGAN asked how a medical provider in Alaska would know
if a visiting patient here had a do-not-resuscitate order in
another state.
REPRESENTATIVE WEYHRAUCH deferred to Dr. Wallington for an
answer.
SENATOR OGAN said he also would like an explanation of the do-
not-resuscitate protocol on page 10 of the bill.
DR. MARIE WALLINGTON, medical ethicist for the Providence health
system in Alaska, told members she has worked extensively with
Representative Weyhrauch and the Senate HESS Committee on this
legislation. She told members that regarding a visitor with a
do-not-resuscitate order in another state, in general, a person
with a do-not-resuscitate order has some kind of definition. If
the medical staff can verify that a person has such an order,
they are relieved from providing resuscitation. An Alaskan who
does not have a do-not-resuscitate order identification on him
will be resuscitated.
9:15 a.m.
MR. PAUL MALLEY, President of Aging with Dignity, a non-profit
organization in Florida, gave the following testimony. He said
he is familiar with what is happening with the Five Wishes
document on a national level and how it is promoting good
quality care at the end of life. He provided the following
highlights of what is happening nationally.
His agency had three goals when it developed the Five Wishes
document. First, it wanted to make a document that was easy to
understand and use. Second, it wanted the document to address
more than medical issues because when people are asked what is
most important to them at the end of life, they most often want
to be at home, with their family, without pain, etcetera, along
with their preferences for life support treatment.
He noted that the popularity of the Five Wishes document has
grown rapidly, and about 6,000 organizations are distributing
it, including hospitals and employers. However, a few
roadblocks remain on the national level. In 15 states, including
Alaska, mandatory forms are required and those forms do not
provide much "wiggle room" for people to put their wishes in
their own words, which can deter people from using those
documents. His understanding of HB 25 is that it makes the
process much more streamlined and effective by putting all of
the requirements for durable powers of attorney for health care,
living wills, organ donation and others under one umbrella. It
also makes it easier for Alaskans to put their wishes in their
own words, whether in a Five Wishes document or another
document.
SENATOR OGAN commented that had he had a living will when he had
his full cardiac arrest, he probably would not be alive right
now because his prognosis was very poor. He said although he had
a fantastic experience with Alaska's medical community, he finds
physicians to be pessimistic in general.
DR. WALLINGTON responded that the fact that a person has signed
an advanced directive does not mean the person has agreed to not
be resuscitated. The physician must be sure of that person's
medical situation and if the physician knows the person cannot
be kept alive, he might consider writing a "Do-Not-Resuscitate"
order but that would not have been the case when Senator Ogan
had his cardiac arrest. She said the medical community hopes
people will spend a lot of time determining how their advance
directives will read so that they are telling the medical staff
how to decide. Had Senator Ogan had an advance directive that
said he wanted every effort to be made to keep him alive, that
would have given clear direction to his medical staff. She
pointed out the old form was terrible in that it gave no
direction in unclear situations.
CHAIR SEEKINS noted the committee had other commitments at this
time and stated his intent to bring HB 25 before the committee
on Thursday. He then adjourned the meeting.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|