Standard of care reform
The Issue
When does standard of care become malpractice?
Standard of care is based on accepted medical practices, but a treatment that works for one patient may not be appropriate for another. When hospitals prioritize general protocols over individual needs, patients may experience preventable harm or lose their ability to make informed decisions. Not every harmful outcome is malpractice, but patients should have the right to question treatment and request reassessment.
We propose that healthcare providers develop individualized treatment plans based on each patient's medical history, condition, and needs. Hospital protocols should serve as guidelines, not rigid rules. Patients should have access to second opinions before major procedures and when treatment causes harm or fails to work. For example, dialysis duration should reflect a patient's condition and ability to tolerate treatment. When treatment is not urgent, patients should have time to discuss risks and appropriate alternatives. Urgent, life-saving care should not be delayed.
Patients should have the right to understand, accept or refuse treatment in accordance with applicable laws, and participate in decisions about their healthcare without intimidation or coercion. Hospitals should include patients and their legally authorized representatives in treatment discussions and protect them from retaliation. Security officers and law enforcement should not be used to pressure patients or interfere with their lawful rights. Legitimate safety interventions should remain permitted when necessary to prevent immediate harm.
Rymbur proposes an independent review board to investigate disputed medical decisions, serious treatment-related harm, and reports of unlawful intimidation or misconduct by hospital security. The board should include qualified healthcare professionals, review patients' individual circumstances, and recommend medically appropriate changes. Evidence-based holistic approaches may be considered when clinically suitable. Hospitals should be held accountable for preventable harm, and following hospital policy should not automatically protect providers from review.
Our goal is to ensure that patients have a meaningful voice in their healthcare, receive treatment suited to their individual needs, and can seek independent review without fear of intimidation or retaliation. The purpose of standard of care is to protect patients, not to justify harmful treatments.
Patient Rights Over Hospital Policy
16
The Issue
When does standard of care become malpractice?
Standard of care is based on accepted medical practices, but a treatment that works for one patient may not be appropriate for another. When hospitals prioritize general protocols over individual needs, patients may experience preventable harm or lose their ability to make informed decisions. Not every harmful outcome is malpractice, but patients should have the right to question treatment and request reassessment.
We propose that healthcare providers develop individualized treatment plans based on each patient's medical history, condition, and needs. Hospital protocols should serve as guidelines, not rigid rules. Patients should have access to second opinions before major procedures and when treatment causes harm or fails to work. For example, dialysis duration should reflect a patient's condition and ability to tolerate treatment. When treatment is not urgent, patients should have time to discuss risks and appropriate alternatives. Urgent, life-saving care should not be delayed.
Patients should have the right to understand, accept or refuse treatment in accordance with applicable laws, and participate in decisions about their healthcare without intimidation or coercion. Hospitals should include patients and their legally authorized representatives in treatment discussions and protect them from retaliation. Security officers and law enforcement should not be used to pressure patients or interfere with their lawful rights. Legitimate safety interventions should remain permitted when necessary to prevent immediate harm.
Rymbur proposes an independent review board to investigate disputed medical decisions, serious treatment-related harm, and reports of unlawful intimidation or misconduct by hospital security. The board should include qualified healthcare professionals, review patients' individual circumstances, and recommend medically appropriate changes. Evidence-based holistic approaches may be considered when clinically suitable. Hospitals should be held accountable for preventable harm, and following hospital policy should not automatically protect providers from review.
Our goal is to ensure that patients have a meaningful voice in their healthcare, receive treatment suited to their individual needs, and can seek independent review without fear of intimidation or retaliation. The purpose of standard of care is to protect patients, not to justify harmful treatments.
Patient Rights Over Hospital Policy
Petition Updates
Share this petition
Petition created on September 24, 2026