Limiting the applicability of medical professional liability to certain practices by medical care providers
HB2212 would amend West Virginia’s medical professional liability statute to narrow when and how the article applies to certain medical care providers. The bill keeps the general two-year limitations period for most medical injury claims against health care providers, but it separately addresses claims against nursing homes, assisted living facilities, related entities or employees, and distinct parts of acute care hospitals that provide intermediate or skilled nursing care. For those facilities, the bill states that claims must be filed within one year of injury or discovery, with a 10-year outer limit, and it also clarifies venue rules for those cases.
The bill also expands the special tolling and minor-injury provisions by raising the protected minor age from under 10 to under 18 and extending the filing deadline to the minor’s 20th birthday, whichever is longer. In addition, it expressly excludes certain services from the medical professional liability article, including abortion-related services, euthanasia, surgery or medical care including hormone therapy designed to change gender attributes, and medical care under Chapter 16A. Claims arising from those excluded services would not be governed by the medical professional liability article’s procedures and limits.
If enacted, HB2212 would amend §55-7B-4 of the West Virginia Code and change the statute of limitations, venue, and scope of coverage for medical professional liability actions. It would preserve the existing framework for most providers while imposing a distinct one-year filing period for claims against nursing homes, assisted living facilities, and certain hospital units, and it would broaden the minor-tolling rule. It would also carve out abortion, euthanasia, gender-affirming hormone therapy, and Chapter 16A care from the article’s protections and limitations, potentially subjecting those claims to different legal rules outside the medical professional liability chapter.
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes, the overall sentiment cannot be measured from legislative history in the materials provided. The bill’s structure suggests a policy preference for tighter liability rules for long-term care and certain hospital settings, while simultaneously removing specified reproductive and gender-related medical services from the statute’s coverage. That combination indicates the bill is likely to draw support from proponents of limiting malpractice exposure in long-term care and opposition from those concerned about restricting access to or increasing litigation over abortion-related and gender-affirming care.
The most notable points of contention are the bill’s exclusion of abortion services, euthanasia, gender-affirming hormone therapy, and Chapter 16A medical care from the medical professional liability article, and the separate one-year limitations period for nursing homes and assisted living facilities. Supporters may view the measure as clarifying liability rules and protecting certain providers from extended exposure, while opponents may argue it creates unequal treatment among providers, narrows remedies for patients, and targets politically sensitive categories of care. The expanded minor protections may be less controversial, but the carve-outs and venue rules are likely to be the central disputes.