Nurses spend years training to treat patients. Yet several states restrict what nurses can do—even when their care is urgently needed. Thirteen states require advance practice nurses to sign contracts with supervising physicians. Other states even restrict nurses’ speech.
Consider three recent cases. Marcy Markes has run her own Missouri allergy clinic for over twenty years; the state still makes her buy an expensive physician’s sign-off to keep treating patients. In California, Jamie Sorenson can’t provide psychiatric services for young women without a supervising physician. In Kansas, Amy Siple faced serious disciplinary action merely for speaking about dementia.
Different states, different specialties, same problem: States are blocking nurses from treating patients.
Pacific Legal Foundation champions the right of medical practitioners to earn a living and the right of patients to access the care of their choosing. We represent Marcy, Jamie, Amy, and other nurses in lawsuits across the country. Any restrictions on the right to provide or receive care should be carefully tailored to serve objective health and safety goals—not to protect entrenched interests or maintain outdated models of care.
"We've been trying to get this straightened out through the legislative process for decades." — Marcy Markes, nurse practitioner
What's at Stake
- Nurse practitioners are licensed healthcare professionals who should be allowed to provide the care they’re trained for. Government-mandated collaborative physician agreements are unnecessary, costly, and burdensome and do nothing to protect public health or safety.
- A license to practice should reflect what a provider is trained and qualified to do—not what established competitors are willing to allow. Laws that prevent qualified professionals from practicing to the full extent of their training deprive them of the right to work and patients of needed care.
For media inquiries
