Wyoming House lawmakers passed a bill on Jan. 30 that adds protections for people who donate blood for themselves or a family member before a procedure, instead of using blood from a community bank. Those opposed argued that the protections are an unnecessary interference in healthcare systems.
According to the American Red Cross, from which a spokesperson testified against the bill at its Jan. 22 hearing in the House Labor, Health and Social Services Committee, autologous and direct blood donation happens when an individual gives blood for themselves or for a blood type compatible family member before a medical procedure. To do this, a physician needs to complete an order form, like a prescription.
HB 135 would require that hospitals and other medical facilities let a patient donate blood to themselves or a family member before a procedure if that facility does blood donations.
The bill would also require blood donation centers to comply with health care providers’ orders for direct donation, unless the person doesn’t qualify to donate blood. That can include someone who is sick, has a heart condition or weighs too little to donate. Blood donation centers would also be required to store blood and could not charge more than a standard fee for the donation.
Sponsor Rep. Joel Guggenmos (R-Riverton) testified that it’s an issue of medical freedom. This sentiment was echoed in other testimonies in favor of the bill. Some brought up concerns about receiving blood from a donor who had received the COVID-19 vaccination.
“What is of most concern is protecting a patient’s choice for bodily autonomy, informed consent, knowing their options regarding receiving blood, including religious rites, and freedom of choice about what can and cannot enter one’s body,” testified Krista O’Dea, a nurse with Remnant Healthcare.
Former Rep. Sarah Penn (R-Fort Washakie) also testified that the process of getting approval for a direct donation can be lengthy and discourage individuals.
“What they encounter is a resistance by healthcare providers to fill out the paperwork,” said Penn. “I think that might be where things get held up, is trying to find a provider willing to write the order.”
Those opposed to the bill, however, argue that healthcare systems already manage direct and autologous donations appropriately. Dr. Ralph Vassallo is the chief medical and scientific officer of Vitalant, a blood donation company with centers in Cheyenne and Casper.
“It’s a government solution looking for a problem that does not exist, provides no public health benefit, could impact the reliability of the community blood supply, and may harm patients,” Vassallo told lawmakers at the House Committee meeting.
Vassallo stated that trained physicians at the blood center are consulted on all orders for direct donation to ensure its medical necessity and safety. He views the bill as threatening that added layer of protection.
“House Bill 135 seeks to remove that blood center physician involvement, which will most certainly lead to adverse patient outcomes,” Vassallo said.
He argued that an increase in direct donations would divert resources away from maintaining a community blood supply, one that Vassallo said routinely meets patient needs. He additionally stressed that medically unnecessary direct blood donations can pose needless health risks.
In response to concerns around COVID-19 vaccines, the American Red Cross put out a joint statement in 2023 reiterating the safety of America’s blood supply, stating that “there is no scientific evidence that demonstrates adverse outcomes from the transfusions of blood products collected from vaccinated donors and, therefore, no medical reason to distinguish or separate blood donations from individuals who have received a COVID-19 vaccination.”
In the same year, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration released a statement that there is no scientific evidence pointing to direct blood donation as being safer for transfusion. “Studies suggest that directed donations may carry greater risk of transmitting infectious diseases than the general blood supply. In addition, the selection of blood or blood components based on donor characteristics that are not supported by scientific evidence might delay or interfere with appropriate medical intervention and life-saving blood transfusion,” the agency said.
HB 135 now moves on to the Senate for introduction.
Another bill currently in the House for introduction would require blood donors to disclose whether or not they have received a COVID-19 or other mRNA vaccination. The packaging of said donation would need to be clearly marked.
