Saturday, March 13, 2010

IN THE NEWS: Thimerosal-autism connection rejected by Special Masters of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims in second trio of Autism Omnibus test Cases

On March 12, 2010, Special Masters of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims rejected assertions that  thimerosal preserved vaccines [2008 Test Cases: Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines (Theory 2)] contributed to development of autism, and dismissed claims to compensation in a trio of Autism Omnibus test cases .

The representative test cases are,
  • King v. Secretary of Health and Human Services Case No. 03-584V
  • Mead v. Secretary of Health and Human Services Case No. 03-215V
  • Dwyer v. Secretary of Health and Human Services Case No. 03-1202V
These test cases represent the strongest out of the 5000+ claims to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) claiming autism causation through vaccine injury and are to inform possible compensation to those claims or not. In all three test cases, the Special Masters found that the petitioners were unable to prove grounds for compensation by evidence sufficient to meet the "Althen standard" [Althen v. HHS].
"It is certainly my hope that our society will find ways to ensure that generous assistance is available to the families of all autistic children, regardless of the cause of their disorders. Such families must cope every day with tremendous challenges in caring for their autistic children, and all are deserving of sympathy and admiration. However, I must decide this case not on sentiment, but by analyzing the evidence. Congress designed the Program to compensate only the families of those individuals whose injuries or deaths can be linked causally, either by a Table Injury presumption or by a preponderance of “causation-in-fact” evidence, to a listed vaccine. In this case, the evidence advanced by the petitioners has fallen far short of demonstrating such a link."

3/12/2010      Special Master Hastings
King v. Secretary of Health and Human Services Case No. 03-584V
"Petitioners’ theory of vaccine-related causation is scientifically unsupportable. In the absence of a sound medical theory causally connecting William’s received vaccines to his autistic condition, the undersigned cannot find the proposed sequence of cause and effect to be logical or temporally appropriate. Having failed to satisfy their burden of proof under the articulated legal standard, petitioners cannot prevail on their claim of vaccine-related causation."

3/12/2010      Special Master Campbell-Smith
Mead v. Secretary of Health and Human Services Case No. 03-215V
"Unfortunately, the Dwyers (and uncounted other parents of children with ASD) have relied upon practitioners and researchers who peddled hope, not opinions grounded in science and medicine. My heart goes out to parents like the Dwyers who struggle daily, emotionally and financially, to care for their children, but I must decide cases based on the law and not sentiment. The law in this case requires preponderant evidence that TCVs caused or substantially contributed to Colin’s ASD, and, by that standard, petitioners are not entitled to compensation"

3/12/2010      Special Master Vowell
Dwyer v. Secretary of Health and Human Services Case No. 03-1202V

A claim for a judicial review within the Court of Federal Claims on a Special Master's ruling can be made with possibilities of outcome from such review being to affirm the decision of the Special Master, to set aside findings of fact and conclusions of law that might be arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or to remand the case for further action in accordance with the Court's direction  After such review there remains an option of an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

On February 12, 2009 the first three Autism Omnibus cases positing a connection between the Measles-Mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccines [2007 Test Cases: MMR and Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines (Theory 1)] in causing  autism
  • Cedillo v. Secretary of Health and Human Services Case No. 98-916V
  • Snyder v. Secretary of Health and Human Services Case No. 01-162V
  • Hazlehurst v. Secretary of Health and Human Services Case No. 03-654V
were also rejected by the Special Masters on similar grounds. Judicial reviews of the February 12, 2009 decisions sustained the decisions of the Special Masters. Two of these three cases have filed appeals to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

For further reading and reference

'Vaccines court' rejects mercury-autism link in 3 test cases
By Thomas H. Maugh II
Los Angeles Times
March 12, 2010 | 12:57 p.m.


Autism vaccine ruling sparks a lot of comment
Los Angeles Times
March 12, 2010 |  5:32 pm


Vaccine court finds no link to autism
CNN Health
March 12, 2010 6:58 p.m. EST


Autism Decisions and Background Information
U.S. Court of Federal Claims

Omnibus Autism Proceeding
Audio and transcripts of the Omnibus Autism trials

About the Omnibus Autism Proceeding
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP)
Health Resources and Services Administration
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

© 2010 Regina G. Claypool-Frey
Disclaimer: This blog publishes news and announcements only as a service to interested persons, the posts are the responsibility of the individual author, and unless otherwise noted do not constitute nor claim to represent the official position of ABA International, its officers or associated entities. This blog makes no representation as to the accuracy of the report and readers are strongly encouraged to consult and reference the primary sources noted.

State legislation - Missouri SB 1030 - Creates the Behavior Analyst Advisory Board and requires licensing to engage in applied behavior analysis

On March 1, 2010, a bill was introduced in the Missouri Senate that would regulate the practice of applied behavior analysis in the state of Missouri by implementation of a professional license. This bill is similar to licensing provisions included in the perfected version of HB 1311 & 1341, an autism insurance bill that was passed in the Missouri House and introduced to the Missouri Senate on February 18, 2010.

SB 1030: AN ACT  To amend chapter 337, RSMo, by adding thereto ten new sections relating to the licensure of the profession of applied behavior analysis, with penalty provisions.

Full text as introduced

History
3/1/2010      S First Read
3/4/2010     Second Read and Referred to the Senate Financial and Governmental Organizations and Elections Committee

SB 1030 requires licensing for individuals who engage in the practice of applied behavior analysis interventions and creates the Behavior Analyst Advisory Board to make recommendations to the State Committee of Psychologists on the licensing requirements.

This Board would be under the authority of the State Committee of Psychologists and would consist of seven members:
  • Three licensed behavior analysts, 
  • One licensed behavior analyst holding a doctoral degree, 
  • One licensed assistant behavior analyst, 
  • One member of the committee who is a licensed psychologist, and 
  • One public member.
Appointments to this Board by the Missouri Governor would be made upon the recommendations of the Director of the Missouri Division of Professional Registration, upon the advice and consent of the Missouri Senate. The Division, prior to submitting such nominations, would solicit nominees from professional associations and licensed behavior analysts or licensed assistant behavior analysts in Missouri

The State Committee of Psychologists would be authorized to review and resolve applications for licensing as a behavior analyst or assistant behavior analyst, until the Governor appoints the Behavior Analyst Advisory Board and the board has a quorum. After the Board is appointed, the Board is authorized to make recommendations to the State Committee of Psychologists about applications for licensure, disciplinary referrals, and approving the entities that certify behavior analysts. The State Committee of Psychologists would make all final decisions.

SB 1030 goes into some detail in defining applied behavior analysis, and specifics and limitations of scope of practice, grounds for disciplinary action and . It also details the licensing application process, issuance of temporary licenses, license renewal, for obtaining an inactive license, for obtaining a provisional license, disqualifications and exemptions (those providing services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) or in supervised clinics).

The license requirement would prohibit use of the title Licensed Behavior Analyst (LBA), or Licensed Assistant Behavior Analyst (LaBA) in Missouri unless licensed, and a person would be prohibited from the practice of applied behavior analysis unless
  • An LBA, 
  • An LaBA working under supervision of an LBA, 
  • A person with the appropriate education who is obtaining supervised field experience in preparation for the licensure, 
  • A licensed Psychologist practicing within the rules and standards of practice for psychologists within Missouri with practice commensurate with level of training and experience, 
  • Those persons providing services under IDEA, 
  • Those enrolled in a course of study at a recognized educational institution which requires application of applied behavior analysis as part of supervised clinical experience.
Under the provisions of SB 1030, any person who violates any provision of the act is guilty of a class A misdemeanor and the State Committee of Psychologists would also be authorized to seek an injunction against unlicensed practitioners.

This act is similar to the perfected version of HCS/HB 1311 & 1341 (2010).

For further reference

SB 1030
Full text as introduced

Missouri Senate

Past posts
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Quicktake: Virginia and Missouri autism insurance bills pass floor votes

© 2010 Regina G. Claypool-Frey
Disclaimer: This blog publishes news and announcements only as a service to interested persons, the posts are the responsibility of the individual author, and unless otherwise noted do not constitute nor claim to represent the official position of ABA International, its officers or associated entities. This blog makes no representation as to the accuracy of the report and readers are strongly encouraged to consult and reference the primary sources noted.

Friday, March 12, 2010

State legislation - Kentucky HB 159/CS autism insurance and licensing of behavior analysts clears House Appropriations & Revenue Committee and returns to the full House

Kentucky HCS HB 159, the bill specifying health insurance coverage for autism and creation of a separate Kentucky Applied Behavior Analyst Licensing Board per the House Committee Substitute, has been reported as having been voted favorably on Thursday March 11, 2010 from the House Appropriations & Revenue Committee, and that funding has been included in the House budget. HCS HB 159 will return to the full Kentucky House of Representatives.

For further reading and reference

To set up a tracking alert for HB 159 during the legislative season
Kentucky.gov Bill Watch

Record of HB 159 at Kentucky Legislature


Kentucky Legislature

Autism Votes Kentucky

Panel backs bill for more colon cancer screening
By Deborah Yetter • dyetter@courier-journal.com • March 11, 2010
[Refers to HB 159 in the article]

Past blog post

Saturday, February 13, 2010
State legislation: Kentucky HCS HB 159 has second reading in the House

© 2010 Regina G. Claypool-Frey
Disclaimer: This blog publishes news and announcements only as a service to interested persons, the posts are the responsibility of the individual author, and unless otherwise noted do not constitute nor claim to represent the official position of ABA International, its officers or associated entities. This blog makes no representation as to the accuracy of the report and readers are strongly encouraged to consult and reference the primary sources noted.

Thursday, March 11, 2010

State legislation - Kansas SB 554, autism insurance bill anticipated for a committee vote on March 11, 2010

**Update 3/11/10 9:36pm PST: Reports are that SB 554 was deliberated on Thursday, but that time
ran out before a vote on the bill could be taken. The suggestion is that this delay in action could put the measure in jeopardy. The next scheduled meeting of the Senate Financial Institutions and Insurance Committee would be Wednesday, March 17, 2010.**
-------------------------------------
Kansas bill, SB 554 :AN ACT concerning insurance; providing coverage for autism spectrum disorder; amending K.S.A. 2009 Supp. 75-6501 and repealing the existing section.

was considered Wednesday, March 10, 2010 in the Senate Financial Institutions and Insurance Committee, and some reports are predicting that the bill would be put to a vote when the Committee next meets Thursday, March 11 at 9:30 am, Rm 152-S.

SB 554 would be limited to a trial on the state health care benefits program and dependent on a report to the legislature on outcome data and recommendation for both continuance of the mandate and possible future expansion to other health insurance carriers and policies.

Applied behavior analysis is defined within the bill, although the "autism services provider" is not stated explicitly to be a BACB certificant or other competencies named. Coverage of behavior analytic services would be subject to prescription by a licensed physician or psychologist.
Services provided pursuant to this paragraph shall be those services which are or have been recognized by peer reviewed literature as providing medical benefit to the patient based upon the patient’s particular autism
spectrum disorder.

Provided services would be dependent on recognition in peer reviewed literature as providing a medical benefit depending on the covered individual's autism spectrum disorder and the insurer or claim administrator would have the right to review utilization and deny claims based on assessment of medical necessity or a determiniation that a covered individual had derived the maximum medical benefit to be expected.

Relative to the trial nature of this mandate, the State Care Health Benefits Commission would be required on or before March 1, 2012 to submit to the President of the Kansas Senate and to the Speaker of the Kansas House of Representatives a report on the impact of the mandate during the plan year of January 1, 2011 - December 31, 2011 on the state health care benefits program, and data on utilization and cost of providing coverage for autism spectrum disorder, and to make recommendation whether to continue the program for the state health care benefits program or whether more utilization and cost data is required.

At the legislative session following delivery of the report, the legislature would have the option to consider whether or not to require the coverage to be included in any individual or group health insurance policy,
medical service plan, contract, hospital service corporation contract, hospital and medical service corporation contract, fraternal benefit society or health maintenance organization which provides coverage for accident
and health services and which is delivered, issued for delivery, amended or renewed in the state of Kansas on or after July 1, 2013.

For further information

Text Kansas SB 554

Kansas Legislature

Autism would be covered by bill
By Barbara Hollingsworth
Topeka Capitol-Journal
Created March 10, 2010 at 6:44pm
Updated March 10, 2010 at 10:52pm


Autism Votes Kansas (no info yet on SB 554)

© 2010 Regina G. Claypool-Frey
Disclaimer: This blog publishes news and announcements only as a service to interested persons, the posts are the responsibility of the individual author, and unless otherwise noted do not constitute nor claim to represent the official position of ABA International, its officers or associated entities. This blog makes no representation as to the accuracy of the report and readers are strongly encouraged to consult and reference the primary sources noted.

State news: Wisconsin - Office of the Commissioner of Insurance Autism Treatment Working Group hammers out details of insurance implementation

On February 16, 2010, the Wisconsin Office of the Commissioner of Insurance Autism Treatment Working Group, the group charged with developing regulations from the statute, Section 632.895 (12m), Wis. Stat., held a meeting to discuss agenda items including,
  • Review of Comments received at December 2nd (2009) hearing.
  • Coverage amount required by insurers when a previous insurer has already provided autism treatment services as required under the mandate.
  • Discussion on training/supervisory requirements the rule places on Speech Language Pathologists and Occupational Therapists.
  • Legislation to include coverage for services provided by Board Certified Behavioral Analysts (BCBAs).
Currently the regulations are of an emergency and interim basis. It was noted on the audio minutes of the meeting that one more extension is allowed by law before working rules are required to be completed.

The audio minutes of the meeting stated that the December (2009) public comment to rulemaking period resulted in many responses requesting that BCBAs to be approved as providers, and questions about the interaction of the insurance mandate with the existing Children's Long-Term Support Home and Community-Based Medicaid Waivers (CLTS Waivers).

A large portion of the meeting centered around the relationship of intensive vs. nonintensive service, behavioral vs. nonbehavioral services, and the requirements of providers identified in the bill to provide intensive services at the competencies specified in the statute. It was noted that there may be an insufficiency of providers with training to provide intensive behavioral therapy within the scope of practice of current license, and that some licensed providers had reservations about being supervised by other licensed providers from outside of their professional area. Some discussion ensued on the complementary relationship of behavioral therapists, SLPs and OTs in a therapeutic team.

The audio transcript is informative and educational the process and deliberation brought to bear in the development of regulation resulting from passage of statute, the balancing act of meeting conditions of law as well as the needs of the client and professional constituencies and, in this situation, the input resulting from the public hearing of the interim regulations.

Unfortunately the transcript suspended at the point where there was to be a discussion of regarding the introduction of  legislation to amend the statute to include Board Certified Behavior Analysts as authorized providers, but the inclusion of this as an agenda item, as well as the comments about the public response  is suggestive that such a development is possible in the near future.

The agenda for the February 16, 2010 meeting suggests that the next meeting of the Working Group will occur in April, 2010.

For more information

Wisconsin Office of the Commissioner of Insurance Autism Treatment Working Group

Memo from the Office of the Commissioner of Insurance dated 22 September 2009

Section 632.895 (12m), Wis. Stat. (12m) TREATMENT FOR AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDERS.

OCI FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ON MANDATED COVERAGE FOR AUTISM SERVICES
"This FAQ is presented for informational purposes only. It does not carry the full force and effect of the law."
Document links to statute and emergency rule.

Frequently Asked Questions About How The Autism Insurance Mandate Affects Children Participating in the CLTS Waivers

WISCONSIN: Frequently Asked Questions About the Autism Insurance Reform Law
Autism Votes

WI Autism Insurance - Updates from Elvis Sightings blog
Blog of a parent who is tracking these events in Wisconsin

'Huge hole' in Wisconsin's autism coverage mandate
Wisconsin State Journal
By MATTHEW DeFOUR mdefour@madison.com 608-252-6144 | Posted: Sunday, November 29, 2009 5:50 pm


© 2010 Regina G. Claypool-Frey
Disclaimer: This blog publishes news and announcements only as a service to interested persons, the posts are the responsibility of the individual author, and unless otherwise noted do not constitute nor claim to represent the official position of ABA International, its officers or associated entities. This blog makes no representation as to the accuracy of the report and readers are strongly encouraged to consult and reference the primary sources noted.

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

State legislation - Oklahoma - Bills to establish scholarships for students with disabilities; one would also expand the "Self-Directed Care Program"

Currently there are two similar bills in the Oklahoma Legislature which would establish scholarships allowing private school choice for students on IEPs. The two bills are,
Committee substitute for House Bill 3393: Developmental disabilities; modifying the Self-Directed Care Pilot Program; creating the Scholarships for Students with Disabilities Program; codification; effective date; emergency.

The committee substitute for House Bill 3393 would establish the Scholarships for Students with Disabilities Program for the purpose of providing a scholarship to a private school of choice for students with disabilities who have had an individualized education program (IEP) developed in accordance with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

The measure specifies criteria that must be met for the student to receive a scholarship and directs the State Department of Education to approve a private school as eligible to participate in the program based on specified criteria.  The bill also provides that, beginning with the 2010-2011 school year, a school district may satisfy its duty to provide special education and related services for children with disabilities by providing a scholarship at the request of a parent for a child to attend a private school or by transferring the child to another school district upon written request by the parent and approval of the receiving district.

HB 3393 would also amend the Self-Directed Care Pilot Program administered through the Oklahoma Department of Human Services by expanding the program statewide and changing its status from pilot to permanent; under the program, individuals with developmental disabilities are given a budget allowance in which they direct services rather than a third party. This creates a saving that is shared by the individuals directing and receiving the service and with the Department of Human Services.
HB 3393 passed in the Oklahoma House on 3/4/2010 with a vote of 78 to 19 and was referred for engrossment.

A similar bill, which has a similar scholarship condition without addressing the Self-Directed Care Pilot Program is,
House Bill 3327: Schools; creating the Scholarships for Students with Disabilities Program; codification; effective date; emergency.

An Act relating to schools; amending 70 O.S. 2001, Section 13-101, which relates to special education services for children with disabilities; authorizing districts to provide scholarship for certain students to attend certain institutions; creating the Scholarships for Students with Disabilities Program; stating intent; specifying procedures; establishing eligibility requirements; establishing formula for maximum scholarship amount; clarifying school districts not responsible for additional costs; precluding liability; providing for codification; providing an effective date; and declaring an emergency.
HB 3327 referred to the House Appropriations and Budget Committee on February 2, 2010 and is currently noted as "dormant" at the legislative website.


For further reading

Oklahoma legislature

Special needs measure passed by House
posted 03/04/10 5:53 pm   producer: Kevin King

Special needs scholarship bill clears House
CapitolBeatOK Staff Report
Published: 04-Mar-2010


Special Needs Scholarship Bill Gains Committee Approval
February 15, 2010

Executive Summary (February 2008)
Self-Directed Services (SDS) Pilot Program Evaluation Report
This report was developed through a collaborative project of the Oklahoma Department of Human Services (OKDHS) and the Center for Learning and Leadership/Oklahoma UCEDD at the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, College of Medicine.


© 2010 Regina G. Claypool-Frey
Disclaimer: This blog publishes news and announcements only as a service to interested persons, the posts are the responsibility of the individual author, and unless otherwise noted do not constitute nor claim to represent the official position of ABA International, its officers or associated entities. This blog makes no representation as to the accuracy of the report and readers are strongly encouraged to consult and reference the primary sources noted.

Tuesday, March 9, 2010

State news & legislation: Wisconsin Governor announces benefit of Federal Mental Health Parity; Wisconsin legislature deliberates on additional state coverage

A March 1,2010 press release from the Office of the [Wisconsin] Governor  Jim Doyle announced an additional health insurance benefit to those in Wisconsin, in addition to those afforded by the recently passed autism health insurance reform, through enactment of the Federal Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 (MHPAEA) requirements.
"MADISON – Governor Jim Doyle today announced that mental health disorders, including autism spectrum disorders, will now be covered by health insurance providers at the same level as all other health conditions.  Implementation of the federal mental health parity law in Wisconsin will help people access mental health treatment they need, and families pursue all available treatments for children with autism.  The new federal requirement builds on the state’s requirement that all health insurance companies cover mental health and new requirement for coverage of autism treatment, which Governor Doyle signed into law in the 2009-2011 state budget...

The federal Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 (MHPAEA) requirements will require equal treatment coverage of mental health conditions including autism.  Wisconsin families enrolled in large group health plans will be affected by these changes.  Individual, small employer, and self-funded insurance plans will still have to comply with state autism coverage requirements..."
On a related note, Wisconsin's legislature is currently deliberating
The Wisconsin Parity Act (Senate Substitute Amendment 1 to SB-362, and Assembly Bill 512
which would provide mental health and substance abuse disorder insurance benefits at parity levels—equal to benefits for medical and surgical procedures—for 700,000 employees of Wisconsin’s small businesses not covered by the Federal Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008, P.L. 110-343. Senate Substitute Amendment 1 to SB-362 was passed in the Senate on January 28, 2010 and is currently in the Assembly, referred to the Committee on Rules. Assembly Bill 512 was passed with a do pass as amended recommendation from the Assembly Committee on Health and Healthcare Reform on February 26, 2010 and is also in the Committee on Rules at the present.

For more information

Full press release from the Office of the Governor [Wisconsin] Jim Doyle
March 1, 2010
Governor Doyle Announces Expanded Health Insurance Coverage will Benefit Families with Autism
New Federal Laws Will Further Help Children with Autism Access Full Treatment

Overview: Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008
Mental Health America

Wisconsin State Legislature

Parity for Wisconsin fact sheet on Senate Substitute Amendment 1 to SB-362, and Assembly Bill 512

Past blog post
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Time sensitive request for comment: Interim final rules to the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008

© 2010 Regina G. Claypool-Frey
Disclaimer: This blog publishes news and announcements only as a service to interested persons, the posts are the responsibility of the individual author, and unless otherwise noted do not constitute nor claim to represent the official position of ABA International, its officers or associated entities. This blog makes no representation as to the accuracy of the report and readers are strongly encouraged to consult and reference the primary sources noted.

Sunday, March 7, 2010

OPPORTUNITY for comment: APA requests public comment: "Principles for Quality Undergraduate Education in Psychology"

Call for Public Comment through May 31, 2010: Principles for Quality Undergraduate Education in Psychology
-----------------------------
"The APA Board of Educational Affairs (BEA) has posted the Principles for Quality Undergraduate Education in Psychology (Draft, January 2010) for review and comment. These recommendations were developed following the 2008 APA National Conference on Undergraduate Education in Psychology.

In accordance with Association Rule 30-8, BEA is circulating the Principles for Quality Undergraduate Education in Psychology to APA governance groups, APA Divisions, State Psychological Associations, other organizations in psychology, departments and schools of psychology, and members of the public.

Feedback will be gathered through May 31, 2010. At the conclusion of public comment, the document will be circulated to all APA governance groups with a request that the Council of Representatives approve as Association policy the Principles for Quality Undergraduate Education in Psychology.

Instructions
All comments are to be submitted electronically via the Education Directorate Public Comment website at http://apaoutside.apa.org/EducCSS/Public/

In order to submit comments, participants must first register. Registration requires participants to use an email address, and to develop a password.

Select the Principles for Quality Undergraduate Education in Psychology from the list of projects to view instructions, register, and to post comments. To submit feedback, please select "edit comments."

Comments may be submitted through May 31, 2010.
If you have any questions, contact Robin Hailstorks, PhD (RHailstorks@apa.org) or
Martha Boenau (MBoenau@apa.org) at 202-336-6140.

Martha Boenau | Associate Director, Office of Precollege and Undergraduate Programs
Education Directorate
American Psychological Association
750 First Street N E , Washington , DC 20002-4242
Tel: (202) 336-6140 | Fax: (202) 336-5962
email: mboenau@apa.org | www.apa.org
-----------------------------
© 2010 Regina G. Claypool-Frey
Disclaimer: This blog publishes news and announcements only as a service to interested persons, the posts are the responsibility of the individual author, and unless otherwise noted do not constitute nor claim to represent the official position of ABA International, its officers or associated entities. This blog makes no representation as to the accuracy of the report and readers are strongly encouraged to consult and reference the primary sources noted.

IN THE NEWS: Father featured in Chicago Tribune series files suit against practitioners of autism alternative therapy

The Chicago Tribune reports that James Coman, a father highlighted in a recent series of columns on alternative autism treatments has filed suit in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois requesting a jury trial and requesting damages against two physicians,their medical practices and an analysis lab .

The suit alleges that the physicians and their medical corporations are culpable of medical negligence, lack of informed consent, intentional misrepresentation, negligent misrepresentation,and battery.

The suit also alleges that the laboratory report used as a basis for application of chelation and other proposed alternative treatments was based on an improper method of testing to obtain the report results and alleges that the laboratory is culpable for negligence, intentional misrepresentation,and civil conspiracy with the physicians and health care corporations named in the suit.

For further reading
Doctors sued over ‘dangerous’ autism treatment
By Patricia Callahan, Tribune reporter
Chicago Tribune
5:19 p.m. CST, March 4, 2010


ScienceBlogs/Respectful Insolence on the suit
Link to a copy of the filed lawsuit
March 5, 2010

Heavy Metals Suit: Are Experimental Autism Docs Taking Legal Risks?
David Whelan
The Science Business: A health care blog
March 5, 2010 - 12:04 pm


"Dubious Medicine"
Chicago Tribune series on unproven treatments for autism
Trine Tsouderos and Patricia Callahan, Chicago Tribune


© 2010 Regina G. Claypool-Frey
Disclaimer: This blog publishes news and announcements only as a service to interested persons, the posts are the responsibility of the individual author, and unless otherwise noted do not constitute nor claim to represent the official position of ABA International, its officers or associated entities. This blog makes no representation as to the accuracy of the report and readers are strongly encouraged to consult and reference the primary sources noted.

State legislation - Maryland HB 1091 & SB 1028 autism insurance bills; would cover applied behavior analysis. Committee hearing March 11, 2010

The Maryland General Assembly is currently entertaining two bills HB 1091 and SB 1028, that would provide health insurance coverage of applied behavior analysis for those with autism spectrum disorders.

A hearing for the first bill, HB 1091, will occur in the House of Delegates’ Health and Government Operations Committee at 1:00 pm Thursday, March 11, 2010, House Office Building, 6 Bladen St., Annapolis, MD 21401-1991.
Autism Votes has an action alert at their Facebook page for advocates for HB 1091 with a list of specific strategic actions that they would like taken on behalf of supporting the bill.
Please see their Facebook page for those details.
Maryland HB 1091: Health Insurance - Coverage of Autism Spectrum Disorders
Bill text
Introduced and read first time: February 17, 2010
Assigned to: Health and Government Operations
Cross-filed bill,
Senate Bill 1028: Health Insurance - Coverage of Autism Spectrum Disorders 
Bill text
Introduced and read first time: February 25, 2010
Assigned to: Rules
The synopses of both bills:
Requiring insurers, nonprofit health service plans, and health maintenance organizations to provide coverage for the diagnosis of autism spectrum disorders and treatment of autism spectrum disorders; requiring specified treatment of autism spectrum disorders to be prescribed and provided by specified individuals; clarifying that specified provisions of the Act may not be construed as limiting specified benefits otherwise available to an individual; prohibiting specified limits on visits to an autism services provider; etc.
Both bills defines applied behavior analysis, include it under the treatment category of "habilitative or rehabilitative care" as prescribed by a licensed physician, psychologist, as provided for under the bills,

Applied behavior analysis would be provided by an individual
(1) Licensed under Title 14 [physician] or Title 18 [psychologist] of the Health Occupations Article, or under the supervision of an individual licensed under Title 14 or Title 18 of the Health Occupations Article; or
(2) A Board Certified Behavior Analyst or a Board Certified Associate [sic] Behavior Analyst credentialed by the Behavior Analyst Certification Board.

For more information
Maryland House Bill 1091
Maryland Senate Bill 1028
Maryland General Assembly

Autism Votes Facebook page on the 3/11/10 hearing
Autism Votes Maryland

Thursday, March 4, 2010
Coffee, Bagels, and Autism Insurance Reform in Maryland

© 2010 Regina G. Claypool-Frey
Disclaimer: This blog publishes news and announcements only as a service to interested persons, the posts are the responsibility of the individual author, and unless otherwise noted do not constitute nor claim to represent the official position of ABA International, its officers or associated entities. This blog makes no representation as to the accuracy of the report and readers are strongly encouraged to consult and reference the primary sources noted.

State advocacy news - North Carolina studies autism insurance coverage including applied behavior analysis

**Update 3/8/10 - Update: Another summing up of developments in North Carolina
Battle of Words & Numbers: Autism Insurance
Posted on March 6, 2010 by momof3au
Autism Society of North Carolina Blog**
-------------------------------------

The North Carolina Joint Study Committee on Autism Spectrum Disorder and Public Safety is currently deliberating feasibility of drafting insurance reform legislation to be submitted within the legislative session commencing May 12, 2010. This legislation would propose to cover the diagnosis and treatment of autism, including applied behavior analysis.

At the most recent meeting on March 4, 2010 an actuarial cost estimate by the firm of Oliver Wyman was presented to the Committee by Marc Lambright, FSA, MAAA. Other presentations were made by Blue Cross/Blue Shield, the North Carolina Chamber of Commerce, and the State Health Plan. The arguments of Blue Cross/Blue Shield turned on the nature of applied behavior analysis, which they argue are educational, not medical, and on their cost estimates which they believe are in the range of $2.37-$11.00/month/policy. The analysis by Oliver Wyman disagrees with those estimates, saying that real costs for states which have passed this type of coverage are more in the range of 0.4%/policy/month or $1/month.

Previous testimony on given to the Committee on February 3, 2010   was an overview of Autism Spectrum Disorder by Dr. Rob Christian, Clinical Assistant Profession of Pediatrics and Child Psychiatry at the Carolina Institute for Developmental Disabilities; a parent perspective by Bev Moore, Secretary of the Autism Society of North Carolina Board of Directors; insurance initiatives in other states and the cost-benefit of removing exclusion of coverage for autism treatment by Lorri Unumb, Senior Policy Advisor for Autism Speaks; and the experience as both a parent and a medical professional on the hardship of insurance loss upon autism diagnosis by Dr. David Kaylie, FACS, of the Duke University Medical Center.


For more information
Joint Study Committee on Autism Spectrum Disorder and Public Safety (2009)
(Register for Meeting notices via email)

March 1, 2010
Actuarial Cost Estimate: North Carolina Draft Bill 2009-SQ-25 [v.1]:AN ACT TO REQUIRE HEALTH BENEFIT PLANS, INCLUDING THE STATE HEALTH PLAN FOR TEACHERS AND STATE EMPLOYEES, TO PROVIDE COVERAGE FOR TREATMENT OF AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDERS.
Oliver Wyman Actuarial Consulting, Inc.
Prepared By:
Marc Lambright, FSA, MAAA

Found at Autism Votes North Carolina

Frequently Asked Questions About the State Autism Insurance Reform Laws
Autism Votes

Autism insurance is debated
March 5, 2010
BY SARAH AVERY - Staff Writer 


Autism Insurance Coverage Update
Posted on March 1, 2010 by dlaxton
Autism society of North Carolina Blog

Autism Insurance in North Carolina – first steps
Posted on February 3, 2010 by dlaxton
Autism society of North Carolina Blog


© 2010 Regina G. Claypool-Frey
Disclaimer: This blog publishes news and announcements only as a service to interested persons, the posts are the responsibility of the individual author, and unless otherwise noted do not constitute nor claim to represent the official position of ABA International, its officers or associated entities. This blog makes no representation as to the accuracy of the report and readers are strongly encouraged to consult and reference the primary sources noted.
 
550 W. Centre Ave., Portage MI 49024-5364
Phone: (269) 492-9310 | Fax: (269) 492-9316 | E-mail: mail@abainternational.org