S00350 amends New York’s Public Health Law to change how health care proxies address artificial nutrition and hydration. The bill expands the statutory definition of “health care” to expressly include hydration and nutrition, and it revises proxy form language so a principal may state wishes about withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining treatment, including artificial nutrition and hydration, to guide an agent’s decisions.
The bill also changes the decision-making standard for health care agents. Under current law, if a principal’s wishes about artificial nutrition and hydration are not known, the agent may lack authority to decide on those measures; this bill removes that limitation and allows the agent to decide based on the principal’s known wishes or, if those wishes cannot be reasonably ascertained, the principal’s best interests after consulting a licensed health professional. The changes apply to both existing and future health care proxies.
Impact
This bill would amend sections 2980, 2981, and 2982 of the Public Health Law, affecting the legal rules governing health care proxies and surrogate decision-making in end-of-life care. It would broaden the scope of proxy authority to include artificial nutrition and hydration as part of health care, and it would eliminate the current statutory restriction that can prevent an agent from deciding on those measures when the principal’s wishes are unknown. The practical effect is to give proxy agents clearer authority over feeding tubes, IV hydration, and similar life-sustaining interventions, including for proxies executed before the bill’s effective date.
Sentiment
The available context shows no recorded committee debate or votes, so there is no documented split in support or opposition in the provided materials. Based on the bill’s structure, it appears aimed at clarifying and modernizing proxy decision-making standards rather than creating a broad new program or mandate. The overall tone is therefore best characterized as technical and policy-focused, with an emphasis on aligning statutory language with end-of-life decision-making practice.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the treatment of artificial nutrition and hydration in cases where a patient’s wishes are not clearly known. Supporters would likely view the bill as giving agents needed flexibility and avoiding an artificial distinction between hydration/nutrition and other life-sustaining treatment. Opponents or critics may be concerned that removing the current limitation could allow agents to make highly sensitive end-of-life decisions without explicit prior instruction from the principal, particularly in situations involving religious, moral, or family disagreements. The bill’s application to proxies created before enactment may also be notable for those concerned about retroactive effect.
An act to amend Sections 1799.103 and 1861 of the Health and Safety Code, to amend Sections 4780, 4781.2, 4781.4, 4781.5, 4782, and 4783 of the Probate Code, and to amend Section 9270 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, relating to health care.