The Good Faith Standard
Health care providers often face difficult decisions when carrying out a patient's directive or following a surrogate's instructions. Arizona law addresses this directly by providing broad legal protection for providers who act in good faith.
A health care provider who makes good faith health care decisions in reliance on the provisions of an apparently genuine health care directive or the direction of a surrogate is immune from criminal and civil liability and is not subject to professional discipline for that reliance.
A.R.S. § 36-3205(A)The standard is practical: if the directive appears genuine and the provider acts in good faith, they are protected. Courts can only find an absence of good faith based on clear and convincing evidence of an improper motive. This high bar encourages providers to follow directives without hesitation.
Conscience Objections and Emergency Situations
Arizona law also recognizes that providers may face situations where following a directive conflicts with their personal conscience. In those cases, a provider can decline to comply, but must promptly notify the surrogate and transfer the patient's care to a willing provider.
Emergency situations receive separate treatment. If a surrogate cannot be contacted after reasonable effort, or if an emergency does not allow enough time to locate and consult the surrogate, the provider is not liable for acting without surrogate input.
One important limit: this immunity does not cover negligent treatment unrelated to the directive. A provider who follows the directive faithfully but provides substandard medical care in other respects can still face liability for that separate negligence.
