SB 107-10: Opioid Restriction Act (Rejected)

[WD]

Opioid Restriction Act

Be it enacted in the CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC OF ATLASIA
Regarding Schedule II controlled substances; dosage limit; exceptions; morphine; opioid antagonist

A. A health professional who is authorized under this title to prescribe controlled substances may not issue a new prescription to be filled or dispensed for a patient outside of a health care institution for a schedule II controlled substance that is an opioid that exceeds ninety morphine milligram equivalents per day.

B. The limit prescribed by subsection A of this section does not apply to:

1. A continuation of a prior prescription that was issued within the previous sixty days.

2. An opioid with a maximum approved total daily dose in the labeling as approved by the United States food and drug administration.

3. A prescription that is issued following a surgical procedure and that is limited to not more than a fourteen-day supply.

4. A patient who:

(a) Has an active oncology diagnosis.

(b) Has a traumatic injury, not including a surgical procedure.

(c) Is receiving skilled nursing facility care.

(d) Is receiving medication-assisted treatment for a substance use disorder.

(e) Is hospitalized.

C. If a health professional believes that a patient requires more than ninety morphine milligram equivalents per day and the patient is not exempt from the limit pursuant to subsection B of this section, the health professional shall first consult with a physician who is licensed pursuant to chapter 13 or 17 of this title and who is board-certified in pain, or an opioid assistance and referral call service, if available, that is designated by the department of health services. The consultation may be done by telephone or through telemedicine.

i. If the opioid ASSISTANCE AND REFERRAL call service agrees with the higher dose, the health professional may issue a prescription for more than ninety morphine milligram equivalents per day. If the consulting physician agrees with the higher dose, the health professional may issue a prescription for more than ninety morphine milligram equivalents per day. If the consulting physician is not available to consult within forty-eight hours after the request, the health professional may prescribe the amount that the health professional believes the patient requires and subsequently have the consultation. If the health professional is a physician who is licensed pursuant to chapter 13 or 17 of this title and is board-certified in pain, the health professional may issue a prescription for more than ninety morphine milligram equivalents per day without a consultation under this subsection.

D. If a patient is prescribed more than ninety morphine milligram equivalents per day pursuant to subsection B or C of this section, the prescribing health professional shall also prescribe for the patient naloxone hydrochloride or any other opioid antagonist that is approved for the treatment of to treat opioid-related overdoses.

E. A prescription order for a schedule II controlled substance that is an opioid that is written for more than ninety morphine milligram equivalents per day is deemed to meet the requirements of an exemption under this section when the prescription order is presented to the dispenser. A pharmacist is not required to verify with the prescriber whether the prescription order complies with this section.

Sponsor: Spark

The gentleman from Florida is recognized.

[Senator-elect Spark]

This bill's intention is to obviously deter any patient from becoming addicted to these painkillers. With the opioid epidemic, countless lives are lost at the expense of the greed of the pharmaceutical industry. We need to put a stop to this before more of our citizens perish. The legislation will protect our citizens from unnecessary prescription dosage.

[Joseph Cao]

§B.2 refers to the "United States," FYI. Never heard of that… concept?

Anyway:

What's the reason for the 60-day cutoff in §B.1?

How often do opioid addictions result from overprescription in a strictly medical context? It's at least probable that a lot of this fleshes out Section VII of the big opioid bill we passed a while ago, but it does have the potential to run afoul of some of the restrictions in that bill.

[Continential]

§B.2 refers to the "United States," FYI. Never heard of that… concept?

I heard that the United States is a forum game.

[Senator-elect Spark]

§B.2 refers to the "United States," FYI. Never heard of that… concept?

Anyway:

What's the reason for the 60-day cutoff in §B.1?

How often do opioid addictions result from overprescription in a strictly medical context? It's at least probable that a lot of this fleshes out Section VII of the big opioid bill we passed a while ago, but it does have the potential to run afoul of some of the restrictions in that bill.

To avoid affecting previous routine prescriptions.

[WD]

Opening a final vote in 24 hours

[Saint Milei]

wouldn't it be better to limit big corporation's ability to produce addicting drugs that are useless and prescribed by doctors?

[WD]

A final vote is now open. Please vote Aye, Nay, or Abstain.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

wouldn't it be better to limit big corporation's ability to produce addicting drugs that are useless and prescribed by doctors?

How would you go about this? I lean against this bill mainly because I'm very skeptical that government telling doctors how to treat their patients is the best way to address the opioid epidemic. This can easily have the effect of pain patients being denied adequate care, which I've seen happen to several friends and relatives who suffer chronic pain.

[WD]

Nay

[S019]

I am confused the way this is worded, I had always considered health professionals and physicians to be the same person?

[West_Midlander]

I don't have a strong opinion on this but I will vote Nay after reading the President's comments.

[Continential]

Nay

[Kuumo]

Nay

[Saint Milei]

wouldn't it be better to limit big corporation's ability to produce addicting drugs that are useless and prescribed by doctors?

How would you go about this? I lean against this bill mainly because I'm very skeptical that government telling doctors how to treat their patients is the best way to address the opioid epidemic. This can easily have the effect of pain patients being denied adequate care, which I've seen happen to several friends and relatives who suffer chronic pain.

We have an atlasia version of the FDA right? We could increase restrictions on addicting drugs or make it harder to approve addicting drugs like this. Make it a requirement that physicians that subscribe these drugs and pharmacists that provide them tell patients how addicting the drugs can be

[DabbingSanta]

Nay

[Saint Milei]

nay

[Deep Dixieland Senator, Muad'dib (OSR MSR)]

Abstain

[If my soul was made of stone]

PRESENT

[S019]

Given my questions weren't answered, I'll go with NAY, given that that seems to be the consensus.

[Joseph Cao]

Abstain. I’m still unsure of the precise effect this would have on our existing opioid actions but what I can see isn’t promising.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Nay

[Former President tack50]

Abstain

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Abstain

Generally if there is one thing you don't want when it comes to drug policy, is confusion about a given policy and there seems to be a lot of that in this thread. On the other hand, it is a situation that deserves attention considering the enormity of the problem.

[Senator-elect Spark]

Abstain