Clearly defined scopes of practice and preservation of workforce are essential to protecting both a family physicians' education as well as their patients' safety.
Public Act 104-170 (effective Jan. 1, 2026) creates a new volunteer licensure status for physicians and other healthcare professionals, reducing administrative barriers for those wishing to provide free or charitable care in clinics, health events, or during public health emergencies.
Implications for Patient Care: For primary care settings—especially in underserved areas—this law opens pathways for additional clinical capacity without requiring retired or part-time physicians to maintain a full license. It may also expand access during health crises, allowing family physicians to more effectively collaborate with volunteer colleagues to meet community needs.
Public Act 104-244 (effective Jan. 1, 2026), originally introduced as a measure granting full independent practice authority to nurse midwives, the final version includes safeguards requiring collaborative alignment and adherence to defined standards.
Implications for Patient Care: This law may increase access to maternal health services, particularly in regions facing shortages of obstetric providers. For family physicians, the emphasis on maintaining collaborative practice helps ensure that maternal and newborn patients continue to benefit from coordinated, physician-led care—minimizing fragmentation and supporting safe outcomes
Public Act 104-432 (effective Jan. 1, 2026) clarifies the authority of non-physician providers regarding therapeutic drug substitutions and equivalency decisions.
Implications for Patient Care: For family physicians managing patients with multiple conditions or medication sensitivities, the risk of substitution without adequate context could complicate treatment plans. The legislation highlights the continued need for physician oversight in medication management, reinforcing the role of primary care in ensuring safety and appropriateness in prescribing.
Public Act 104-378 (effective Jan. 1, 2026) expands the authority to consent to Practitioner Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) to include legally authorized surrogates.
Implications for Patient Care: For family physicians who often guide advance care planning discussions, this law provides clearer legal pathways for decision-making when patients cannot advocate for themselves. It reduces barriers to honoring patient wishes while ensuring clinical teams can move forward with confidence and clarity in complex situations.
AI Disclosure (Public Act 104-054)
Public Act 104-054 (effective August 1, 2025) requires online behavioral health services to disclose when AI is being used in patient interactions, and limits AI from making final therapeutic decisions in therapy or psychotherapy settings. Notably, the legislation specifically exempts physicians from these restrictions, recognizing their unique clinical training and authority in medical decision-making.
Implications for Patient Care: For family physicians, this underscores the importance of maintaining transparency when using AI-enabled tools, such as symptom checkers or clinical decision support systems. Even if exempted, physicians may encounter patients who have concerns about AI in their care and will need to address those concerns with clarity and reassurance, reinforcing trust in the physician–patient relationship.
Anticipated 2026 AI Legislation
During debate on HB 1806 (Public Act 104-054), the House sponsor explicitly stated an intent to introduce further legislation to regulate AI in insurance claim denials and prior authorization processes. This signals that AI oversight in payer systems will likely be a legislative priority in the near future.
Implications for Patient Care: Family physicians are among the most burdened by prior authorization and claim denials, which delay treatment and erode time for direct patient care. Any future law that limits or regulates AI in insurance decisions could directly impact practice efficiency and patient access. Physicians should be prepared to advocate for AI policies that preserve clinical judgment and ensure that technology supports, rather than undermines, timely care delivery.