Is preventive health care an essential business function? That's the question at the heart of a filed last week in Michigan on behalf of three medical providers challenging the scope of the state's stay-at-home emergency order. As reported by The Detroit news, the lawsuit says that the orders are "unconstitutionally vague, violate due process rights and infringe on the commerce clause, which reserves the power to regulate interstate and foreign commerce to Congress."

The lawsuit, filed by Grand Health Partners, Wellston Medical Center and Primary Health Services, seeks to allow medical providers to resume normal operations. Also included in the suit is a patient whose March knee-replacement surgery has been postponed indefinitely due to the order.

According to the lawsuit, "he is in excruciating pain and unable to get prescription pain medication until he can be seen on June 11," and has to reduce his work hours by 80%. The lawsuit cites another patient suffered a bladder and kidney infection as a result of a delayed procedure.

Beyond a concern for patients' health and well-being, of course, is the health systems' own financial state. Unable to see patients and perform exams and medical procedures, health systems have had to furlough workers and are "on the brink of financial ruin."

The state's chief medical executive Dr. Joneigh Khaldun had told health care providers that the order was flexible, and the administration of care was intended to be at the discretion of the provider. That guidance, however, is too vague, the lawsuit argues, and not worth the risk of the penalties that could be enforced.

Meanwhile, elective surgeries have resumed in at least 30 states, in many cases with stipulations to ensure additional protective measures are taken for patients and health care workers.

Read more:

Instant Insights /

Health systems sue over Michigan's ban on 'non-essential' procedures

More From HR Executive

Related Stories

Recommended For You