The Public Health Committee voted Wednesday to send an omnibus bill to the House that includes several sections, including new protections for home health workers, but some questions remain about other aspects of the bill. There is.
The committee voted on a number of bills during Wednesday's meeting, including Senate Bill 1 – the Connecticut Resident Health and Safety Act – an omnibus bill that includes bills related to many aspects of health care in the state.
Sections 1 through 9 of the bill detail new obligations regarding protections for home health workers who provide home visits to disabled and elderly patients in the state.
These provisions include:
- Risk assessment of health care workers before entering the home.
- Safety and de-escalation training for workers.
- Safety checks such as emergency buttons.and
- Possibility to safely escort workers in risk environments.
The bill, introduced by the Senate Democratic Caucus in response to the deaths of two home health care workers last year, would provide additional protections and new training programs for home health care workers.
While the bill's first provisions garnered some bipartisan support, there are concerns within the committee that other provisions need to be polished before the bill can be voted on or passed.
Rep. Nicole Clarides-Ditoria (R-Seymour) voted “no” to move the bill out of committee and added her own votes to the bill to allow continued debate on certain parts of the bill. He said he wanted to raise a flag. She said she had questions about the section on unions and qualifications for medical professionals.
Mr Clarides-Ditoria, a leading member of the committee, said he would like to see further discussion on:
- Sections 10-18 concern the “matching system” between medical school graduates and residents under qualified physicians.
- Sections 26-27 address the disposal system for opiates, which can go to waste, she said.
- Article 28 allows doctors licensed by the Public Health Service to form trade unions, which is already possible in some circumstances, Clarides d'Itria said.
Claridesditoria said he was unsure whether these provisions were needed in the bill and would like to see more discussion about including language on these issues.
“Most of these bills are actually in progress, so there's a lot of work to be done in some of them,” Claridesditoria said.
Sen. Jeff Gordon (R-Woodstock) said he is concerned that the system for handling surplus opiates could put pharmacies in a difficult situation.
Gordon asked how long pharmacies would have to wait if they ran out of disposable pouches containing chemicals that reduce opioid pills, or if pharmacies could provide the pouches at a later date.
These real-world concerns are why he voted “no” to flag the bill, he said.
Claridesditoria said she would like to see the bill's original provisions regarding home health workers become their own bill.
Sen. Saud Anwar, a Democrat from South Windsor who is also a physician, said the intent of SB 1, the Senate's priority bill this session, was always to include multiple legislative concepts.
“It's always going to be a big bill,” he said.
Anwar, the commission's co-chairman, said during the meeting that some of the provisions Clarides-Ditoria is concerned about are valid. He said there is currently a lack of residency programs in the state, with about 10 percent of medical school graduates not finding a residency opportunity.
“We want family physicians, psychiatrists, obstetricians and gynecologists, and doctors in all these specialties, but we don't have a policy yet to address that,” he said.
Anwar said some of the language in the section on disposal of opioid drugs “needs to be addressed.”
