From abortion to mental health: 5 things to know about a CT omnibus health care bill

CT Insider – Wednesday, March 26, 2025
By Cris Villalonga-Vivoni

Expanding equitable access to health care is the focus of several Democrat lawmakers this legislative session, especially in anticipation of any possible federal changes under the new administration. One way is through a robust health care bill, co-signed by 20 Democrats that preemptively sets up protections while introducing local initiatives.

The legislative Public Health Committee is sponsoring proposed Senate Bill No. 7, an omnibus measure that includes over 30 provisions, from adding reproductive and gender-affirming care shield laws to dealing with water fluoridation.

There was a lot of back-and-forth discussion during the committee’s Monday afternoon public hearing with written and spoken testimony from advocates, lawmakers and residents praising certain sections while also identifying concerns.

Here are five things the bill would do if adopted without change:

Reinforce shield laws

Connecticut was the first state in 2022 to pass the Reproductive Freedom Defense Act, more commonly known as shield laws, which protects providers who offer reproductive health care and gender-affirming care from repercussions in states where its banned.

The proposed update to the law would further grant protection to licensed health care professionals who consult or perform reproductive and gender-affirming health care in “good faith,” prompted by concerns of the patient’s health, from any discipline from their employer, even if it’s against the policies of the facility where they work.

The provision also would allow doctors to perform emergency reproductive care, including abortions, in the emergency room even if that’s outside the facility’s standard scope of practice. Medical providers at such facilities could also refuse to transfer a patient to another hospital without worry of penalty, if they believe delay of care would cause more harm.

The bill does set up some restrictions, such as ensuring providers are working within their specialty practice and offering accurate educational help that aligns with accepted standards of medical care.

Efforts to enhance shield laws have been pushed in the past, but no action was taken, according to the Connecticut Hospital Association’s testimony in opposition to the section. The bill’s broad language would let a medical provider’s judgment and point of view bypass protocols and policies of the medical facility. At a time where standards of care aren’t yet settled, particularly with the introduction of gender-affirming care restrictions, it also creates “a foothold for ideology,” according to the association’s testimony.

Several Catholic leaders submitted testimony against this section of the Senate Bill, describing it as an attack on Catholic health care providers and religious freedoms.

Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act

In the same vein of the enhanced shield law protections, two other sections aim to establish a Connecticut version of the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor statute.

Better known as EMTALA, the longstanding federal law requires hospitals receiving Medicare funds to screen, treat and stabilize patients experiencing a medical emergency, regardless of their ability to pay.

The Connecticut version of EMTALA heavily mirrors the federal law but introduces additional protections against discrimination based on sex, age, and race. It would also include language restricting hospitals from transferring patients in a medical emergency unless certain care conditions are met.

Advocates and some lawmakers argued the Connecticut version of EMTALA is necessary, considering the ongoing uncertainty on the federal level, especially concerning reproductive health.

Connecticut Assistant Attorney General Alma Nunley testified at the public hearing that the 2022 overturning of Roe v. Wade led to a “patchwork” of laws across the nation for and against abortion care.

At the time, former president Joe Biden’s administration interpreted EMTALA to include emergency abortions and pursued a lawsuit against Idaho that passed an abortion ban with minimal exceptions. Nunley said the current administration under President Donald Trump withdrew the federal case against Idaho within the first few weeks of being in office, indicating a potential change in attitude without outwardly stating it.

“Although abortion is legal in Connecticut, the lack of clarity regarding the federal government’s changed position leaves open the strong possibility that the federal government would not enforce EMTALA against a hospital that failed to provide an emergency abortion,” Nunley said.

Others, however, said that the duplication is unnecessary, noting the Connecticut laws are not restrictive and that federal EMTALA law and its regulations haven’t changed. The Connecticut Hospital Association, for example, wrote in its public testimony that the section could prompt hostile litigation or additional “federal scrutiny” if passed.

Establish a Safe Harbor Fund

Another proposal in the bill is the creation of a state-run Safe Harbor fund. The money would be used to cover travel expenses for out-of-staters looking to take advantage of Connecticut’s already-established reproductive and gender-affirming care protections.

State Treasurer Erick Russell, who spoke in favor of the fund, said the money would be collected through private donations but overseen and safeguarded by a Board of Trustees within the Treasurer’s office. The fund would be part of a national network, Russell said noting that Connecticut is already speaking with similar states setting up their own funds. How much money needed for the fund isn’t clear. Russell expects it to be less than others in the national network, as Connecticut is surrounded by states where abortion and gender-affirming care are legal.

It would work by giving grants to nonprofits and health care providers who would then subsidize travel expenses, such as lodging, for patients living in states with abortion restrictions. Russell said the funds could also benefit Connecticut residents in restrictive states, such as college students, to travel home for the health care they need.

Establish a children’s mental health pilot program

Another section of the bill would appropriate more than $3 million from the general fund to establish an awareness and treatment pilot program in certain school districts to address the growing mental and behavioral health crisis among Connecticut youth.

The proposed two-year pilot would enable 100 students to use an online mental and behavioral health tool to offer education, peer-to-peer support services, private online sessions with care providers and more.

It’d be hosted by the state Department of Education and the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services. According to the bill, the pilot’s first year would include launching a targeted digital marketing campaign and building partnerships between schools and community-based care. The second year would focus on referring students to providers as needed and enhancing their engagement with the tools.

Open Department of Public Health funding accounts

With the ongoing threats to federally funded programs, two sections under the bill aim to fill funding gaps in the state Department of Public Health.

The first establishes an emergency financial safeguard account through the state department to address “unexpected shortfalls” in public health funding. The goal is to ensure the department can continue public health services at risk of losing funds from any federal changes.

The second would establish an urgent public health communication account to be expanded by the state agency to provide “timely, effective communication” during public health emergencies.

In her written testimony, state Department of Public Health Commissioner Dr. Manisha Juthani said this would help bolster the department’s effort to combat misinformation around public health events, such as vaccine safety during the ongoing measles outbreak in Texas.

The bill appropriates around $35 million in total for both accounts, but isn’t included in Gov. Ned Lamont’s proposed budget.

Here are a few more things that Senate Bill No. 7 could do if passed:

• Require water companies to keep fluoride levels within the federal recommendation of 0.7 milligrams per liter.
• Establish a state license category for health care executives and hospital administrators with the state Public Health Department.
• Constitute opioid use disorder as a public health crisis in the state and establish a working group through the Connecticut Alcohol and Drug Policy Council to address it.
• Require medical professionals treating patients with epilepsy to educate them about the risk of sudden unexpected death that can result from the condition.
• Introduce changes to requirements under the state health care regulatory process where medical facilities must seek approval for a “certificate of need” before adding or removing services.

Access this article at its original source.