The opioid crisis has raged throughout the United States for years. Iowa, like every other state and DC,[i] has a good Samaritan law on the books to help save lives. However, buried in the Iowa Code is a limitation that currently hinders Iowans’ ability to help others and themselves.

The state of Iowa currently has a one-time limit to save a life. Iowa’s good Samaritan law regarding overdoses is only good for one time if you are also using. This means that if you are using, your friend (or you) overdoses, and you have already used your “good Samaritan” call to 911, you would no longer be an overdose reporter and would be vulnerable to prosecution. The relevant language is hidden in the middle of the statute. “Overdose reporter” means a person who seeks medical assistance for an overdose patient and who has not previously received immunity under this section.”[ii]

The good Samaritan law should incentivize citizens to do what is right. In these types of situations there are two separate issues, the drug use and the overdose situation.  The latter issue, that a person is potentially dying from a drug overdose should take precedence for people in this situation over the separate issue of illicit drug use. This is not to say that the use of illicit drugs is insignificant, but in the face of the life and death scenario of overdose, people should spring into action and not waste valuable seconds debating whether to call for help, for fear of facing prosecution. The limitation on immunity from prosecution impairs citizens from making the necessary quick decision and getting medical assistance. Harsh state drug laws juxtaposed against a weakened good Samaritan law stand as a barrier to the law incentivizing citizens from calling for medical assistance and preventing further deaths. 

Iowa Law Obstructs Positive Trends

Overdose deaths are down nationally, but not in Iowa.[iii] State laws should work to help that number go down. Expanding Iowa’s good Samaritan statute to give immunity to more people could further this goal. Citizens want to save lives, and police and county attorneys are supportive of the law’s purpose as well.[iv] According to the CDC, overdose deaths fell by 10% nationwide between 2023 and 2024, but Iowa was the only Midwest state where deaths continued to rise.[v] Overdoses on street drugs are falling at the fastest rate ever, according to the CDC.[vi]Data shows 97,000 fatal overdoses in a 12-month period. This is 14.5% lower than 2023. Put another way, 16,000 lives were saved.[vii] The purpose of the law is for people in overdose situations to get the help they need without fear of prosecution.[viii] Police officers and county attorneys support the law’s purpose. Story County Attorney stated, “We definitely want people seeking medical assistance for others who are in a dangerous situation because of drugs and drug overdoses.”[ix] On the officer side, Des Moines Police Department Sgt. Paul Parizek said the law is valuable because it allows police to use their judgment to determine whether a person should be taken to jail. “Does every drunk need to be locked up for public intox?” he said. “You can't just go around throwing everyone in jail. That doesn't work.”[x] So, if both officers and attorneys agree with the law, and it has been passed in all 50 states and DC, why are overdose deaths not falling in Iowa?

Aggressive Drug Laws in Iowa

Recently passed aggressive laws to combat deaths from fentanyl could be a major deterrent to preventing overdose deaths in Iowa, strengthening the good Samaritan law by having it cover more people could stop people from thinking twice before calling for medical assistance and help the law incentivize good conduct.

In 2024 a law passed in the Iowa House that would make a person who unlawfully gives another person fentanyl or fentanyl-related substances eligible for a first-degree murder charge if consumption of the drug results in death. A conviction on this law would carry a mandatory sentence of life in prison without parole.[xi] Not only has that law been proposed, but laws also already exist in Iowa that exact severe punishment for violations of Iowa’s drug manufacturing, possession and delivery of drugs law. The laws read: 

A person who causes the death of another person while participating in a violation of

this subsection and who is not entitled to protection under section 124.418, shall be sentenced to three times the term otherwise imposed by law, and no such judgment, sentence, or part thereof shall be deferred or suspended.[xii]

A person who causes serious bodily injury to another person while participating in a violation of this subsection and who is not entitled to protection under section 124.418, shall be sentenced to two times the term otherwise imposed by law, and no such judgment, sentence, or part thereof shall be deferred or suspended.[xiii][xiv]

These aggressive laws, while helping to combat legitimate drug abuse and trafficking problems in Iowa, can also serve to deter people who have used their immunity from helping those in need or themselves for fear of the harsh penalties. The possibility of spending years in jail for doing the right thing, helping another person, or yourself, escape death could prevent people from making the decision to help. The potential new law, which could sweep up people who unknowingly give another person fentanyl laced products, demonstrates the inflexible nature of the current Iowa state government on this issue. Drug possession certainly stands as a major political and health issue, but an inflexible stance does not help solve the issue. That unyielding and unmerciful stance could make people even more afraid to call for help if they have used their good Samaritan status up already. 

Allowing the law to cover more people would potentially save more lives. The mental calculus for those who had been in the situation before would be one quick step. “I need to get help”, rather than the current multi step one. 1) “I need to get help” 2) “But I already got help once, so I could go to jail this time, can I afford to do that?” While a person is considering the harshness of Iowa’s drug laws and the potential impact on them, a person, or possibly themselves, are having a medical emergency. Iowa’s current restriction creates fear where there should be decisive action. The good Samaritan law recognizes a simple moral truth, found across cultures, times and belief systems. Human life is inherently valuable and must be protected from harm. Iowa’s good Samaritan law spits in the face of this moral norm. The statement becomes: human life is inherently valuable and must be protected, but is protecting it worth the cost to me? This addition completely undermines the sentiment of this moral norm by making a standard of unconditional care for others conditional on its effects on the person acting. Iowa’s law should be changed to properly reflect the purpose of the law.

Iowa citizens have good reason to be afraid to help if they have already used their immunity. A person could spend the rest of their life in jail while attempting to do what is right. The state law should not encourage punishment for good faith attempts to help. When a person has helped someone in the past, their attempt to do so again should be lauded, not punished, regardless of their own mistakes. If Iowa truly wants a law modeled on the example of the good Samaritan, and not on the priest and the Levite who pass the stranger by,[xv] they must remove the restriction and allow anyone who calls for help to receive immunity for doing good. The drug use of the reporter is a separate serious issue that can, and should, be dealt with later. 

Besides the fact that the restriction cuts against the purpose of the law, punishment for doing the right thing based simply on past conduct and current status as a user of drugs, even in an attempt to combat a real problem, is discriminatory on the basis of status, which is prohibited by law.