AN ACT Relating to enacting the good faith pain act;
Summary
HB1638, titled the “Good Faith Pain Act,” creates new statutory protections for health care professionals who prescribe or dispense opioid drugs in good faith for legitimate medical purposes. The bill applies to a range of licensed practitioners, including podiatric physicians and surgeons, dentists, osteopathic physicians and surgeons, physicians, physician assistants, advanced registered nurse practitioners, and pharmacists. For covered prescribers, the bill states that they may not be subject to criminal or civil liability or disciplinary action by their licensing board or department solely for prescribing opioids to a patient with chronic pain when the prescription is deemed medically appropriate in consultation with the practitioner and the patient has signed written informed consent documented in the medical record. For pharmacists, the bill similarly protects good-faith dispensing of prescription opioids after confirming the prescription is valid and was issued under those conditions.
Impact
The bill would add multiple new sections to Washington’s licensing chapters governing health professions, effectively limiting professional discipline and liability exposure for covered providers and pharmacists in specified opioid-prescribing and dispensing circumstances. It does not legalize opioid prescribing generally; rather, it creates a safe harbor tied to chronic pain treatment, medical appropriateness, consultation, and documented informed consent. The act is declared necessary for immediate preservation of public peace, health, or safety and takes effect immediately upon enactment.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears strongly supportive of clinicians who treat chronic pain and is framed as a protection for good-faith medical practice rather than a restriction. There are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, so there is no documented public debate or formal vote history to indicate broader legislative support or opposition. The overall tone of the bill is permissive and protective toward prescribers and pharmacists.
Contention
The main policy tension implied by the bill is between protecting legitimate pain treatment and preserving oversight of opioid prescribing and dispensing. The bill narrows liability and disciplinary authority for licensing boards and the Department of Health when the provider acts in good faith and follows the informed-consent requirements, which could concern opponents focused on opioid misuse, diversion, or weakened professional accountability. Supporters would likely emphasize access to chronic pain treatment and shielding clinicians from punishment for medically appropriate care.
AN ACT Relating to prohibiting local jurisdictions from enacting regulations to preclude cannabis producers, processors, and retailers from their jurisdictions;