In state legislatures across the country, the “right to repair” movement is gaining momentum. Thirty-three states and Puerto Rico considered right to repair legislation during the 2023 legislative session. And while this might be a good idea for some products, policymakers should oppose any attempts to weaken regulated safety requirements for repairing life-saving and life-enhancing medical devices. Patient safety is too great a risk.
In theory, expanding repair options might seem like a good idea. It is the democratization of product repair. And certainly, there are many industries in which this is the right path forward.
In fact, advocates for this movement notched a symbolic win in California after tech giant Apple unexpectedly supported a bill that would require electronics companies to provide more access to the parts and instructions to fix their products.
What the right-to-repair movement ignores though is that not all product classes are created equal. And a one-size-fits-all solution is not a real solution, especially when it comes to regulated products like medical devices.
Medical devices are an important part of the health care services industry. Every single person has been helped by a medical device — whether it’s an EKG machine, a defibrillator, dialysis pump, X-ray machine, or any of the other more than 24,000 devices that medical professionals use every day.
Now imagine if that device didn’t work.
It is this risk that should give policymakers considering these right-to-repair laws pause. Given the influence medical devices have on public welfare, do we really want to introduce more risk? Risk that could impact functionality?
During my time in the House of Representatives, I served on the Subcommittee on Health whose jurisdiction included oversight over the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the agency in charge of the effective regulation of these devices to guarantee their quality and safety. I know firsthand the diversity and sophisticated nature of these products. By granting broad, open access by repair shops unregulated by the FDA, we could be undermining device integrity maintained by the whole regulatory system.
Essentially, if a smartphone or tablet malfunctions from a bad repair job, there’s sure to be some headaches, but you’ll survive. On the other hand, if a sophisticated medical device experiences the same type of error because a hospital chose unregulated repair options, it can be a matter of life or death.
It is also important to consider possible unintended consequences this type of policy might have on underserved and racial minority communities, which are most often among the truly disadvantaged.
One report from researchers with UCLA, Johns Hopkins and Harvard shows that hospitals with a large share of African American patients have significant funding disparities and receive lower payments for care from programs like Medicare. Unfortunately, these facilities are the ones that will most likely use the unregulated repair option to fit necessary maintenance into tight budgets. Therefore, we could be unintentionally putting our community on the front lines of the increased risk a broad right-to-repair policy would enable.
Cutting corners in the medical field should never be an option. A 2016 study by the National Library of Medicine found that cutting corners was a “common practice” that contributes to adverse outcomes. That’s simply unacceptable.
Albert R. Wynn is a former member of the U.S. House of Representatives, representing Maryland’s 4th Congressional District. While in the House, he served as a member of the Subcommittee on Health.
Person who wrote this is a horrible race baiting piece of shit, nothing else.
What an idiotic argument. So they are better off with NO working equipment?
Also there is literally an FCC study that states that there is NO evidence that third part repair is “dangerous”. If fact they found more problems with “Manufacturer Authorized” repair.
Perhaps you should outlaw car mechanics, house painters, plumbers, electricians and all the other “3rd Party” laborers out there keeping America running.
The “safety” argument has always been used by large corporations to try to completely vertically integrate their businesses and force either extremely expensive repair or more like buy new to pad their bottom lines.
Your constituency WOULD be harmed by outlawing 3rd party repair.
There is so much bluster about social media channels being candid about their income sources when peddling a particular idea or product, yet here in “legacy media” apparently you can pretend your not biased. Did you bother to disclose from whom you make your income now that your out of office?
So are you a shill for tech companies or a lazy person who does no research before shooting your mouth off?
It’s one of the two. Please let the readers know which one it is.
What’s journalistic integrity? This article was either written by someone who hates black people or who hasn’t done a modicum of research. Stop spreading blatant misinformation when you are too lazy to gain even a basic understanding of the topics that you cover.
Describing Mr Wynn simply by his public service and committee assignments from 15 years ago is disingenuous at best.
The blurb at the bottom should absolutely describe him by his chosen profession: lobbyist.
1. If a hospital in a low-income area requires service to their medical equipment, their current avenues of action are either to fork over exuberant sums of money for that servicing OR they will simply throw the equipment away because they can’t afford to repair it. What you seem to be forgetting is that the liability falls onto the hospital. If equipment fails then it’s the fault of the hospital. It is their responsibility to ensure that their equipment meets the required standards. In other words, a hospital isn’t going to risk their patients by settling for service from some shady dealer. And if they do, that’s on the hospital, not the unqualified technician.
2. Being able to choose who services your products is far safer than being forced to use an “authorized” service provider that you do not know and know nothing about. Being “authorized” doesn’t make you infallible. In fact it doesn’t make you any more or less competent than someone who isn’t “authorized.” The term “authorized,” in this case, doesn’t even have any intrinsic value. It’s just a title that is arbitrarily bestowed upon service centers that pay for the privilege. Like people paying for blue check marks on Twitter.
3. Lack of competition in the repair space not only drives up the cost of basic maintenance, but also lowers the quality due to complacency. Why would an “authorized” service center provide prompt and efficient service when they know that there is no competition for them to worry about? They’ll charge thousands of dollars and get to it within 3-6 months and maybe it will work when they are done.
Holy lobbyist, Batman!
How does buying an entirely new piece of medical equipment instead of swapping out a bad power supply for a new one make it more affordable?
This is quite a stance for a man who lobbies in favor of private prisons, which are significantly more detrimental to minority communities.
This is a load of bullshit… just another piece of “Black lives marketing” trying to advantage the consumer electronics cartel.
Hi there. So, if hospitals that treat more black patients have less funding, then would it not be in their best interest to be able to spend less money on affordable equipment, rather than being unable to replace their devices that break down?
Also, the “2016 National Library of Medicine” study defined “cutting corners” as (1) the partial or complete omission of patient care, (2) delays in providing care and (3) the failure to do things correctly. That doesn’t seem particularly relevant to the point you’re trying to make here.
Lastly, the medical field is an out-of-control nightmare driven by obscene profits off of those who quite literally CANNOT choose not to pay, and often die for it. Co-pays for life-preserving drugs are routinely in the thousands, and medical debt is the number one reason for declaring bankruptcy. Personally, I find that to be far more harmful to marginalized communities than poorly-funded hospitals being able to source affordable parts and services for their devices.
This is such a brain dead argument. If anything it’s racist to assume that black people can’t repair their own stuff. This article should be taken down.
So, a lobbyist for private prisons and medical supply companies is arguing that $20 repairs on $50k devices is… “racist”… so hospitals have to spend the full amount on a new device from the companies that pay him, rather than making simple repairs… to keep using existing devices?
And you publish this stuff uncritically?
How dumb that article is ??? After reading the whole thing to have an opinion, it appears clearly that this is false and written in the intent of block the right to repair act.
What a crock. What clown wrote this?
What a joke of an article. Who’s paying you, lobbyist scum?
Albert R Wynn paid lobbyist selling out his former constituents while playing the race card. This represents so much of what is wrong with America. No moral character whatsoever Albert.