Policy News

IAFP Policy Priorities

The IAFP works hard to advance policies that support our physician members and their patients. During the 2026 cycle, IAFP is working to support Graduate Medical Education, enhance the physician workforce in Idaho, preserve the physician-patient relationship, reduce administrative burden, and to protect Idaho Medicaid.

The IAFP works to collaborate with community partners across the state on a variety of topics relevant to family doctors and their patients. Visit our community collaborations page for more details on our collaborative policy and community support work.

Women’s Health

The IAFP is proud of our successful work to expand Idaho’s medical exception for women experiencing medical complications. Read more about the Adkins decision here.

IAFP Official Statement on the Adkins v Idaho Decision

Under the Adkins v. State of Idaho decision, issued on April 11, 2025, the Idaho court gave the medical exception to Idaho’s abortion bans its broadest possible reading. The court clarified that the “prevent the death of the pregnant woman” exception is not limited to situations where death is imminent or certain — but extends to circumstances where a physician determines, in their good-faith medical judgment, that the patient is at risk of a harm to their health that could lead to a shortened lifespan if left untreated.

This interpretation aligns the legal exception more closely with established medical standards of care, allowing clinicians to provide medically indicated abortions to manage high-risk or complicated pregnancies, including health threats, before a patient is in or near critical condition. The decision thus broadens the practical scope of the exception so physicians may act to avert substantial risk and safeguard maternal health, while still documenting their clinical judgment consistent with statutory requirements. The decision is binding against the State of Idaho and precludes the ability of any Idaho county prosecutor to successfully charge and try a physician in court who provides abortion care in these circumstances.

The IAFP Board voted to endorse the Reproductive Freedom and Privacy Act in May 2025

The Idaho Academy of Family Physicians (IAFP) supports the Reproductive Freedom and Privacy Act as part of our commitment to responsible medical practice and the well-being of Idaho communities.

Family physicians are trained to care for patients throughout their lives, including offering comprehensive reproductive health care. Idaho’s laws currently threaten physicians with severe legal penalties for providing essential medical care during pregnancy. When physicians are compelled to seek legal counsel before acting in a medical emergency, the safety of Idaho patients is compromised.

The Reproductive Freedom and Privacy Act would restore patients’ ability to make private medical decisions with their doctors without government interference. This initiative protects patient autonomy, patient safety, and evidence-based practice. It ensures that when complications arise, physicians can provide the care their patients need.

Passage of the Reproductive Freedom and Privacy Act will allow family physicians to:

Deliver pregnancy-related care without fear of legal repercussions
Protect the health and lives of pregnant patients in emergencies
Provide comprehensive counseling and options based on medical best practices
Restore the confidential relationship between patients and their physicians

The Idaho Academy of Family Physicians stands with our patients, our physicians, and our communities. We support the Reproductive Freedom and Privacy Act as a necessary step toward restoring safe, compassionate, and accessible reproductive health care for all Idahoans.

IAFP Official Comments on Policy Issues

IAFP Comments on 4% Provider Rate Cuts
IAFP Comments on Rural Health Transformation Program (RHTP) Funds
IAFP Comments on the OSBE’s Undergraduate Medical Education Plan
IAFP Response to IDHW RFI on MCO Transition

Workforce

The IAFP Workforce and Rural Support Committee meets regularly and conducted a first of its kind Rural Workforce Survey of Idaho’s Critical Access Hospitals in 2025. The survey results are available here. The summary and recommended policy actions are here.

Minor Consent Law

View a detailed webinar on the legal implications of SB 1329 from Smith+Malek

Advocacy handout–Parental Rights in Medical Decision-Making Act

Information courtesy of Kim Stanger, JD–Holland & Hart

Effective July 1, 2024, the Parents’ Rights in Medical Decision-Making Act will generally require healthcare providers to obtain consent from parents for any healthcare services rendered to an unemancipated minor in Idaho. (I.C. § 32-1015). Among other limited exceptions, the Act states:

a health care provider may authorize or furnish a health care service without obtaining the informed consent of the minor child’s parent, if:
(a) A parent of the minor child has given blanket consent authorizing the health care provider to furnish the health care service…

(I.C. § 32-1015(4)(a), emphasis added). The Act does not define or explain the requirements for an effective “blanket consent,” but the underlined language cited above does seem to affirm that, in the case of a blanket consent, the provider is not required to obtain “informed” consent. This is a significant departure from existing Idaho law.

Healthcare providers who fail to obtain sufficiently informed consent may be subject to a lawsuit for lack of informed consent. (See, e.g., Shabinaw v. Brown, 131 Idaho 747, 963 P.2d 1184 (1998)).

In contrast, the new minor consent Act states that a healthcare provider who obtains a blanket consent from the parent may render healthcare services “without obtaining the informed consent of the minor child’s parent…”. Presumably, a blanket consent is one by which a parent prospectively agrees to some range of unspecified care even though they may not have all the information otherwise required for effective informed consent.

The permissible scope of a blanket consent is still not defined, however. One would assume it could cover a wide range of routine primary care services, but the more serious or sensitive the healthcare service, the more likely it is that a parent may claim that they never intended to consent to such. Thus, healthcare providers should be cautious when using blanket consents: the more serious, risky, or controversial the care, the more important it is to obtain specific informed consent.

Until we have more definitive guidance from courts or the legislature, we provide guidelines that may help healthcare providers who intend to use or rely on blanket consents.

Guidelines

We have prepared a sample blanket consent (click here to download), but we cannot guarantee whether an Idaho court would conclude that it is effective under I.C. § 32-1015 or otherwise. Healthcare providers should carefully consider the circumstances and revise or implement any consent process appropriately before simply relying on any blanket consent form.

FAQs: Idaho’s New Parental Consent Law

To view a video webinar explaining this topic click here.