HCA Healthcare Corp. | Report on risk mitigation regarding state restrictions for emergency abortions at HCA Healthcare Corp.

Status
8.22% votes in favour
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Proposal number
5
Resolution details
Company ticker
HCA
Resolution ask
Report on or disclose
ESG theme
  • Social
ESG sub-theme
  • Public health
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Health Care
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
RESOLVED: Shareholders request that HCA’s Board of Directors issue a public report detailing any known and potential risks to the Company posed by state laws severely restricting abortions in the case of medical emergencies. The report should detail any strategies beyond litigation and legal compliance that the company may deploy to minimize or mitigate these risks. The report should be published prior to December 31, 2024, omitting confidential information and completed at reasonable expense.
Supporting statement
SUPPORTING STATEMENT: Shareholders recommend that the report evaluate: how the Company makes determinations regarding arguably conflicting state and federal laws; how the Company educates its medical professionals on the evolving legal landscape; and how it recruits and retains medical professionals in restrictive states.

According to its 2022 Factsheet: “HCA Healthcare is one of the nation’s leading providers of healthcare services with 182 hospitals and 2,300+ sites of care, including surgery centers, freestanding ERs, urgent care centers, home health, and physician clinics located in 20 states.” However, about 70% of HCA Healthcare’s US-based hospitals operate in states that have adopted laws severely restricting access to abortion absent exigent circumstances that often differ from federal statutory emergency abortion exceptions; the Florida and Texas facilities represent 50% of the company’s hospitals and 50% of consolidated revenues. According to HCA’s 2023 10-K: “This geographic concentration makes us particularly sensitive to regulatory, economic, public health, environmental and competitive conditions in those states.”

For example, it has been widely reported that in states that have passed severe restrictions on abortion, doctors have been struggling with the legality of providing terminations for ectopic pregnancies, incomplete miscarriages, or other circumstances where miscarriage is inevitable or the health or life of the pregnant woman is in danger. This uncertainty is not only dangerous for patients, but also puts physicians and the hospital at legal risk. The Department of Health and Human Services has already begun investigating and found that at least two hospitals violated federal law when they denied a patient abortion care. The potential for improperly denying abortion care poses legal, financial, and reputational risks to HCA.

Further, abortion bans are creating impediments to physician recruitment and retention. Physicians are showing “reluctance to practice in places where making the best decisions for a patient could result in huge fines or even a prison sentence.”1 This trend has already begun, with fewer medical school graduates applying to residencies in abortion ban states.2 If this worrying trend continues, it will pose risks to HCA beyond limited capacity for abortion services—there will be fewer physicians and fewer services being provided for all obstetric and gynecological patients at HCA.

The patchwork of state and federal laws regarding abortion (specifically the varying definitions for what constitutes a medical emergency warranting an exception) poses risks for HCA because, as a healthcare provider, it must necessarily make determinations for when it can legally provide an abortion.

DISCLAIMER: By including a shareholder resolution or management proposal in this database, neither the PRI nor the sponsor of the resolution or proposal is seeking authority to act as proxy for any shareholder; shareholders should vote their proxies in accordance with their own policies and requirements.

Any voting recommendations set forth in the descriptions of the resolutions and management proposals included in this database are made by the sponsors of those resolutions and proposals, and do not represent the views of the PRI.

Information on the shareholder resolutions, management proposals and votes in this database have been obtained from sources that are believed to be reliable, but the PRI does not represent that it is accurate, complete, or up-to-date, including information relating to resolutions and management proposals, other signatories’ vote pre-declarations (including voting rationales), or the current status of a resolution or proposal. You should consult companies’ proxy statements for complete information on all matters to be voted on at a meeting.