BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 138
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 14, 2013
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Mike Gatto, Chair
SB 138 (Hernández) - As Amended: August 6, 2013
Policy Committee: HealthVote:13-5
Judiciary Vote: 7-3
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
Yes Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill requires health plans and insurers to accommodate an
individual's wishes for confidential communication related to
"sensitive services," as defined, for persons insured as
dependents on another individuals' policy, as well as an
individuals' wishes for non-disclosure of certain insurance
communications in cases where an insured individual specifies
disclosure will endanger them.
FISCAL EFFECT
One-time costs for initial review of health plan compliance in
the range of $500,000 (Managed Care Fund) to the Department of
Managed Health Care (DMHC). Costs to the California Department
of Insurance (CDI) should be minor and absorbable, as they
appear to rely on insurance plan attestation of compliance
rather than reviewing privacy policies and plan contracts for
compliance.
Potential increase in ongoing enforcement costs to CDI and DMHC,
not likely to exceed $100,000 total annually (Insurance
Fund/Managed Care Fund).
COMMENTS
1)Rationale . This bill intends to protect patient
confidentiality for insured dependents accessing services
related to sexual and reproductive health, HIV/AIDS, substance
use and mental health care or any other health care service
when disclosure could cause harm. Studies indicate, for
example, minors and young adults delay or forgo needed
SB 138
Page 2
reproductive health care because of concerns about
confidentiality. This bill mirrors and strengthens existing
federal protections related to an individual's wishes for
confidentiality of their medical information. Supporters of
this bill indicate it will allow individuals to access
services without worrying that parents or spouses will be
notified. This bill is sponsored by the California Family
Health Council.
2)Background . A significant body of federal law and state law
protect privacy of an individual's personal health information
(PHI). However, PHI related to dependents is often included
in insurance communications such as Explanation of Benefits
(EOB) forms that are sent to the policyholder as a
notification of paid claims. EOB forms, for example, may list
specific services that insured individuals may wish to keep
confidential from the policyholder. State law allows minors
to consent to certain types of medical care, such as care
related to the prevention or treatment of pregnancy. Federal
law now allows children to remain on their parent's policies
until age 26, which supporters indicate is another impetus for
strengthening confidentiality protections around certain
services.
3)Concerns . Although significant amendments have been taken that
addressed some of their concerns, the California Association
of Health Plans (CAHP) and the Association of California Life
& Health Insurance Companies (ACLHIC) still have significant
concerns related to implementation and workability details.
They indicate discussions are ongoing with the bill's author
to resolve outstanding issues.
Analysis Prepared by : Lisa Murawski / APPR. / (916) 319-2081