02/04/2005 03:15 PM House LABOR & COMMERCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB102 | |
| HB109 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 102 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 109 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE LABOR AND COMMERCE STANDING COMMITTEE
February 4, 2005
3:19 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Bob Lynn
Representative Gabrielle LeDoux
Representative David Guttenberg
Representative Tom Anderson
Representative Pete Kott
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Norm Rokeberg
Representative Harry Crawford
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 102
"An Act relating to the licensure of foreign medical graduates;
and providing for an effective date."
- MOVED OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 109
"An Act relating to establishing a screening, tracking, and
intervention program related to the hearing ability of newborns
and infants; providing an exemption to licensure as an
audiologist for certain persons performing hearing screening
tests; relating to insurance coverage for newborn and infant
hearing screening; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 102
SHORT TITLE: FOREIGN MEDICAL SCHOOL GRADUATES
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) STOLTZE
01/21/05 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/21/05 (H) L&C, FIN
02/04/05 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17
BILL: HB 109
SHORT TITLE: SCREENING NEWBORNS FOR HEARING ABILITY
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) RAMRAS
01/26/05 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/26/05 (H) L&C, HES, FIN
02/04/05 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE BILL STOLTZE
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HB 102.
RICK URION, Director
Division of Occupational Licensing
Department of Commerce, Community, & Economic Development
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 102.
DR. JAMES JORDAN, executive director
Alaska State Medical Association
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 102.
DR. GEORGE STEWART, physician,
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 102.
JANE PIERSON, Staff
for Representative Jay Ramras
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 109.
MS. PAM MUELLER, Deaf Services Coordinator
Southeast Alaska Independent Living, Incorporated (SAIL)
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 109.
JODY RUMPH, Executive Director
Governors Council on Disability and Special Education
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 109.
MARY WAYMILLER, Citizen
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 109.
SIG RESTED, Master
Northland Pioneer Grange, of the Alaska State Grange
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 109.
STEPHANIE BIRCH, Acting Chief
Womens, Children's, and Family Health Unit
Division of Public Health
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 109.
NANCY GERSHERT, speech pathologist
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 109.
LISA OWENS, speech pathologist/audiologist
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 109.
DEBBIE GOLDEN, Director of Program Services
March of Dimes of Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 109.
DIANE DISANTO, Community Development Specialist
Mayor's Office
Municipality of Anchorage
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 109.
DR. MARTIN BEALS, private physician
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 109.
KRISTA GALYEN, Program Coordinator
Special Education Service Agency for Hearing Impaired (SESA)
Consultation and Education for Early Hearing Impairment (CEEHI)
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 109.
MICHELLE RADIN, Education Specialist
Special Education Service Agency for Hearing Impaired (SESA)
Consultation and Education for Early Hearing Impairment (CEEHI)
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 109.
REED STOOPS, Insurance Specialist
America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP)
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 109.
ACTION NARRATIVE
CHAIR TOM ANDERSON called the House Labor and Commerce Standing
Committee meeting to order at 3:19:16 PM Representatives Lynn,
LeDoux, Guttenberg, Anderson were present at the call to order.
Representative Kott arrived as the meeting was in progress.
HB 102-FOREIGN MEDICAL SCHOOL GRADUATES
CHAIR ANDERSON announced that the first order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 102 "An Act relating to the licensure of
foreign medical graduates; and providing for an effective date."
REPRESENTATIVE BILL STOLTZE, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor,
pointed out that his specialty was listening to people and that
through listening, he has ascertained that a shortage of
specialties in medicine exist here in Alaska. He then
acknowledged that there are many qualified people here that can
help solve this problem.
CHAIR ANDERSON pointed out that one of the things we don't want
is the insurgence of doctors into Alaska who come from countries
that are not standards are lower. He then asked what the
representative thought concerning this and whether changing the
board rules would weed these kind out.
REPRESENTATIVE BILL STOLTZE answered that a board with
professionals will weed these people out and furthermore, they
will be asking those who are qualified to practice outstanding
medicine into the state.
3:24:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN asked if there was anything that will cover
English speaking ability for those that practice medicine.
REPRESENTATIVE BILL STOLTZE answered that he did not know.
CHAIR ANDERSON stated that this question would be held and
reexamined by one of the doctors that are here as witnesses. He
then opened the floor up to the public.
3:25:23 PM
RICK URION, Director, Division of Occupational Licensing,
Department of Commerce, Community, & Economic Development
(DCCED), standing in favor of the bill, stated that the biggest
problem here is that in all of the Alaskan laws there are no
discretionary powers within his grasp. He pointed out that there
had been many instances when he could have solved many problems
if he was given them.
MR. URION further stated that the laws are written for the worst
case scenario and that life was not black and white. He ends by
stating that public safety could have been less jeopardized if
he had been given some discretionary opinion.
3:26:15 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG mentioned that the question by
Representative Lynn was an interesting one and that he wanted to
revisit it. He postulated that in the event of a Chinese and
Eastern European coming into take the test for competency, would
there be a standard that the board would take to test competency
and also, if they translate foreign documents to aid in
licensing.
MR. URION answered by stating that they are not going to allow
people in that cannot speak English. He then said that most of
the people are already licensed elsewhere in the United States.
3:27:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX mentioned that she was under the
impression that doctors simply would not be practicing in this
state unless they have been practicing in other states.
MR. URION commented that people will not be practicing in this
state unless they are highly skilled in their field. The problem
that exists is that these very people cannot come into the state
and practice due to constraints in the current law.
CHAIR ANDERSON further stated that through the application
process there would be enough background research to determine
their abilities.
3:28:49 PM
Dr. JAMES JORDAN, executive director of the Alaska State Medical
Association, stated that he would be augmenting to previously
submitted testament. In the written statement he stated that he
referred to a 2002 study that showed that a shortage of 200
physicians in their market area. He then said that he has
information that this is corroborated in a 2005 study. He then
continues to say that in 2009 there will be a need for 261 more
physicians.
3:31:01 PM
DR. JORDAN continued by stating that one of the problems is
delivering culturally competent care. He supported this
statement by saying that in the school system alone there are
instances of at least 80 languages being spoken by indigenous
peoples. He ended by stating that foreign-born doctors could
offer an excellent venue for culturally diverse treatment.
DR. GEORGE STEWART, physician in Alaska, stated that it is very
difficult to recruit specialists here. From his own personal
experience, he stated that his own specialty suffers from a
shortage. He asserted that the state of Alaska is getting to a
critical point. The idea behind the bill is to not lower the bar
to allow less qualified people in, but to allow highly qualified
people in that do not fit the tight temporal guidelines that are
found in the current law. He emphasized that Alaska has a
critical shortage of physicians. By denying physicians the
access to Alaska, he stated that you are also denying Alaskans
healthcare.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN wanted to know if there is going to be an
active effort to recruit these medical specialties.
DR. STEWART indicated that he has been recruiting for eight
years. He commented that these are not for people that are from
areas far and remote but people that have been practicing in the
United States for years.
3:38:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG pointed out that last year the state
was not very supportive of the Naturopathic bill. He then asked
if the two doctors were supportive of this practice.
DR. JORDAN commented that his group is supportive of
naturopathic physicians.
CHAIR ANDERSON asked if there was anything else to be added.
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZEE pointed out that as a diabetic, he has a
small conflict of interest in supporting the bill, but that
others like him suffer the same lack of physicians. It takes six
months to schedule an appointment with endocrinologists. He
pointed out that his particular doctor is aging and that this
trend is a growing one in Alaska. He advised that the
specialists the state does have are going to be retiring and
gone very soon.
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG asked if anyone at the meeting was on
the medical board, and he then followed this up with a question
concerning the mechanics and procedures of the application
process.
CHAIR ANDERSON reiterated the question by asking how the
application process works.
3:41:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE answered by stating that the state
medical board sits down to look at and decide what alternative
criteria is available, and then they go through the
administrative process of adopting new regulations so they are
outlined for everyone, and thus, the tests for competency are
then made very apparent. These regulations will include three
requirements. The first is licensure in another state and
second, a board specialty. A new requirement would be passing a
core comprehension test. The medical student is presented with a
patient (an actor) who presents with various symptoms. The
student doctor must properly diagnose the problem without
failure.
3:43:46 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX points out that in section 3B, that these
requirements are in the language. She then asked if it was the
intent of this medical board to have the option of requiring
licensure in another state for three years, but not being
required to adopt the criteria.
REPRESENTATIVE BILL STOLTZE answers that this is correct. It
does give the board an alternate criteria to use in exceptional
cases. He said that it removes the current rigidity.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked if it means 'either one of these
requirements'. She further asked if this meant that someone who
graduated from Oxford or Edinburgh would have the same ease in
application as someone from the Universities of Washington and
Oregon.
REPRESENTATIVE BILL STOLTZE noted that it is not lowering
standards- it provides alternatives for equitable standards for
applicants.
3:45:51 PM
DR. JORDAN interjected and reiterated that Representative
Stoltze is correct in saying that what the bill is giving Alaska
an alternative competency requirements that would equate to the
three years required for American applicants. He further stated
that the committee is not talking about new graduates; they are
talking about graduates not in US medical programs that require
the completion of a three-year residencies.
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT pointed out that this would allow a
physician who has practiced for 15 years, who then moved to
Arizona and practiced for a year, eligibility to work in Alaska.
As it stands now, he said that he would not be eligible since he
missed the three-year rule. He then said that this language
offers a competent professional the prospect of getting by this.
CHAIR ANDERSON closed public testimony.
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT moved HB 102 out of committee with
individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes.
[No objection was stated, and therefore HB 102 was treated as
moved out of the House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee.]
HB 109-SCREENING NEWBORNS FOR HEARING ABILITY
3:48:19 PM
CHAIR ANDERSON announced that the next order of business would
be House Bill 109 HOUSE BILL NO. 109, "An Act relating to
establishing a screening, tracking, and intervention program
related to the hearing ability of newborns and infants;
providing an exemption to licensure as an audiologist for
certain persons performing hearing screening tests; relating to
insurance coverage for newborn and infant hearing screening; and
providing for an effective date."
JANE PIERSON, legislative aid staff to Representative Jay
Ramras, introduced the bill by saying that there are four
issues: foundation, function, nurse versus audiologist, the
fiscal note that comes health and social services. She read the
following:
Each year in Alaska approximately 10,000 babies are born.
30 to 40 of these children will be born with congenital
hearing defects. Hearing loss is more prevalent than any
other congenital abnormalities for which newborns are
routinely screened. Studies have shown that children with a
hearing impairment not detected at birth, will likely not
have their impairment detected, until 2-3 years of age.
Studies have also shown that the most critical time for
speech development and cognitive development is from birth
to 3 years of age. Ultimately, this bill will save the
state money, due to the fact that when children are not
identified with a hearing impairment, and aided early, the
special education costs for a child with a hearing loss may
cost an additional $420,000, and deafness has an estimated
lifetime cost of approximately $1 million per individual.
3:49:49 PM
MS. PIERSON went on to say that the bill have three initial
offerings. She said that it would require the testing of infants
for hearing loss before leaving the hospital, or within 30 days
if not born in a hospital. She then said that HB 109 will ensure
the development of a reporting and tracking system for newborns
that are deemed to be at risk. She continued by stating that
this could no longer be tracked privately or any other way due
to the implantation of HIPAA. (Health Information Portability
Act) Finally, she pointed out that this bill provided diagnostic
intervention- any child who fails an initial hearing screening
is referred for a re-screening. She continued by stating that
once a child is diagnosed with a hearing impairment, parents
will be provided by the department with written information on
the availability services through community resources,
government agencies, parent support organizations affiliated
with deafness, counseling and education services, and programs
offered through the department and the Department of Education
and Early Development.
MS. PIERSON then went on to the issue of using a nurse versus an
audiologist. She read the following:
HB 109 would allow for a trained nurse to delegate the
administration of one of two tests, the automated auditory
brainstem response tests (AABR) or the otoacoustic emission
test (OAE). The AABR test is the most commonly used test.
It consists of putting microphones into the infant's ears,
while EEG sensors are placed on the child's head. Clicking
sounds are then played through the microphones and the
sensors pick up the infant's brain response. An OAE test
involves putting microphones in the infant's ears while a
computer records inner ear response.
3:51:03 PM
MS.PIERSON continued this by adding that nurses can easily be
trained to do both of these tasks. It is the logical choice for
them to be the individuals to perform the tests, since they are
already performing numerous tests on the newborns.
MS. PIERSON ended with a discussion of the fiscal note provided
by the Health and Social Services Department. She read the
following:
Please take a look at the fiscal note provided by the
Department of Health & Social Services in your package.
The fiscal note associated with HB 109 is significantly
lower than any provided previously in 2001 or 2003, when
versions of this bill were also presented before this
committee. This is because public health nursing centers
in outlying communities have been provided with the
necessary equipment through Federal Grants. Also, money
for the services requested in this bill is already in place
through Infant Learning Programs. Additionally, Federal
Grant monies have been extended through the next three
years, which would explain the increase in the fiscal note
for the year 2009. However, it should be noted that these
grants may be extended and the additional monies in the
note may not be required.
3:52:47 PM
MS. PIERSON then stated that she had met with the Director of
Public Health, Dr. Manzagar. She indicated that it was he who
instigated the changes in the CS currently being discussed. She
announced that one of the big changes include a date change on
page one, and a portion of page five, lines 15 through 19, were
deleted. She pointed out that this is due to the fact that most
insurers are already paying for these costs, due to the fact
that both Medicaid regulations and most private insurers are
already paying the $20-60 dollar fee associated with infant
hearing screening at birth. Additionally, she said, it would
not be feasible for the Department of Health and Social Services
to take on these charges. She ended by stating that she could
have a redline copy of the bill created and run you through the
changes on the CS
3:53:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT interjected that the committee had not
adopted the CS.
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT moved to adopt CSHB 109, Version 10924-
LS0450\G, as the working document. There being no objection,
Version G was before the committee.
CHAIR ANDERSON asked Ms. Pierson to explain the differences
between the original bill and the new bill.
3:53:48 PM
MS. PIERSON began to list the changes that have occurred in the
bill. She started with page two, line 15, 90 percent has been
changed to 100 percent, and on line 16, and the phrase ending
with '2007 'has been changed to '2008'. She continued with page
4, line 15, where '50 births' has been changed to '20 births';
also on page 4, line 26, psychological and cognitive development
have been added; lines 27 and 28 are new. On page five, she said
that lines 15-19 were deleted and lines 18 and 19 have new
phrases which read 'and sent to the department for tracking
under AS 47.20.320'. On page six, line 15, the words 'certified
nurse-midwife and direct-entry midwife' were added. On page
seven, line 10 the words 'tracking and intervention' were added,
along with the addition of lines 18-22. Finally, lines 28-30,
which now read 'when conducting a performance evaluation, the
department shall develop hearing screening performance standards
and must include a false positive rate and false negative rate
of screening results that are less than or equal to 3percent. On
page eight the definition for health care insurer is now defined
as " entity regulated by the director of insurance, Department
of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development, and includes a
health hospital, or medical service plan corporation, and a
health maintenance organization. She ended with the change found
on line 16, where the sound level of 30 dB was changed to 40 dB.
3:56:44 PM
CHAIR ANDERSON announced that his intent is to hold the bill. He
indicated that there are substantive changes and he thought that
more time is needed to allow the committee members to go over
the changes that have been discussed by Ms. Pierson. Public
Testimony is next and he urged the witnesses to try and not be
duplicative or redundant and to keep the testimony under three
minutes.
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT stated that in section 4 of the bill, he
wanted to know what the number of births outside hospitals would
be.
MS. PIERSON answered that there are others that could give this
information more correctly.
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT reiterated that the reason he is interested
in this, he pointed out that in the last sentence, which read,
'the department employees shall notify the child's parents of
the merits of having the child screened for hearing ability',
gives him some concern. Unless there is another division of the
bill, the part that deals with legislative intent 'services
shall implement the program so that 100 percent of newborns are
being screened'- this is not necessarily true if there are
births outside the hospital and/or they opt not to do it.
MS. PIERSON stated that there is a form that parents can sign if
they choose not to do it, and there are those that choose not to
even respond it is the case with certain native groups. The
public health nurse now has the equipment and can go into native
villages and its no longer that hard to have these native groups
fall in line.
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT agreed and said that it is a lofty goal to
have native groups fall in line with the testing, and achieve
100percent.
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG followed this up, referring to page
five, where he asked what kinds of protections and what kind of
forms would allow this to happen and secondly what kinds of
repercussions would the child have if parents refuse testing?
MS. PIERSON stated that there was a request from the division of
public health but it did not make it to the creation of the CS.
They requested an additional part that would have read that the
department will exhibit oversight responsibility for EHDI
programs. She then said that this was not what she wanted and
requested for one of the online people who she thought might be
able to answer this question. She pointed out that Stephanie
Birch would be a good person to ask
CHAIR ANDERSON announced that he would first open public
testimony to the floor and then go back to Representative
Guttenberg's question and Stephanie Birch's answer. He opens the
floor to Ms. Pam Mueller-Guy, a deaf woman from Juneau, Alaska.
PAM MUELLER-GUY, Deaf Services Coordinator, Southeast Alaska
Independent Living, Incorporated (SAIL), read the following
text:
I was born as a hearing child. However, I had to have a
blood transfusion from a stranger when I was five days old,
due to my rare blood type. Due to this transfusion, I
became deaf, but no one realized it until I was about 2
years old. Even as a toddler, I could speak a little bit
and mimicked my brother while playing with toys. My
grandmother finally figured out that I could not hear,
realizing I never responded when they called my name. Only
when a loud noise occurred, such as a stomp on the floor,
did I look their way. They finally took me to have a
hearing test and I was diagnosed with severe profound nerve
deafness (caused by disease or severe trauma to the
cochlear nerve). They wept for me because they did not know
what to do. They asked, "How can she hear music?" My whole
family is musical! They had grief until they realized I
could experience music. My mother wrote letters to all the
important people that know about deafness and to the John
Tracy clinic in California. They gave a lot of info and
said it was needed for parent to work with me and go to
school half-day to learn how to work with me. I started
speech classes at 2.5 years old then started wearing
hearing aids at 3.5 years old and started half days until
four years old to stay at the boarding parents house during
the week because deaf school was 25 miles away from my
home. I hope that for the new generation that they can be
diagnosed early and begin to learn early so they may be
capable of writing English easy instead of the hard way. I
see most deaf and hard of hearing have a hard time in
Alaska for jobs. Schools also should have programs
specifically for children who are deaf so they wont be
isolated. I am hopeful children who are deaf will be able
to communicate in both the hearing world and the deaf
world. The newborn hearing screen would be best for all
needs so the parents of the baby can start early to learn
to cope with the child and their lives would be easier!
MS. MUELLER-GUY went on to talk about her experience of being
held back in school and how it affected her social wellbeing and
learning throughout her childhood. She emphasized that she was
held back a total of four years which really affected her
ability to maintain friendships.
CHAIR ANDERSON asked Ms. Mueller-Guy if she would be able to
hand a written copy of the testimony to each committee member.
MS. MUELLER-GUY indicated that she would be able to do this.
CHAIR ANDERSON asked for other input from others in the
audience.
JODY RUMPH, executive director of the Governors Council on
Disability and Special Education, applauded the bill and
announced her strong support for the provisions, saving that
"its time had come" and that the "cost was down" and she
enthusiastically said that the committee needed to pass it
through.
CHAIR ANDERSON asked for another deposition from the online
group.
MARY WAYMILLER, citizen, Fairbanks, Alaska, stated that she
works for a service organization focused on helping the hearing
impaired. According to her, the organization gives 4000 dollars
worth of grant money to area schools to help with the cost of
testing equipment and therapy. She ended by stating that this
bill would help with the costs.
CHAIR ANDERSON asked for the next speaker, Sig Restad.
SIG RESTED, Master, Northland Pioneer Grange, of the Alaska
State Grange, spoke in favor of this legislation, and
characterized the legislation as cost-effective and inexpensive.
He said that he had one question, which dealt with page 6, lines
14-5. He continued by stating that physician assistants were
excluded from the list of healthcare professionals and wanted to
know why this was the case.
CHAIR ANDERSON pointed out that the Valley Hospital has
Physician Assistants, and this should be considered by the
committee.
STEPHANIE BIRCH, Acting Chief, Women's, Children's, and Family
Health Unit, Division of Public Health, stated there were two
questions that needed to be addressed. The first one, she
continued, has to do with the number of home deliveries. She
answered this question by stating that there were approximately
150 home deliveries a year, as well as 200 deliveries at
birthing centers set up in rural areas. The second question had
to do with protection of provider liability. She asked everyone
to refer to page 6, lines 14-20, to which she opined that when
parents refuse the free testing, there are other places that
these parents can go to later on, after it is offered at the
child's birth.
4:11:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG asked if there was a conflict between
this section (the Women's and Children's Family Health Unit) and
HIPA.
MS. BIRCH resolutely said that her group is a covered entity
under HPA and there is no conflict of interest.
CHAIR ANDERSON asked for another witness to speak.
NANCY GERSHERT, Speech Pathologist, felt that the opportunities
created by early intervention were too great to miss and when a
child is given the technology and the early intervention, the
difference is amazing. She maintained that it was truly sad when
a child missed early testing.
LISA OWENS, speech pathologist and audiologist, Anchorage,
Alaska, stated that previous in her career, she worked with the
state of Colorado and was able to watch their early testing
program get started. The differences between the children that
were tested later, between 18 months and 2 years, versus those
that were tested early, before three months, was great. In her
practice here in Alaska, she announced that she currently has
twenty kids, half of which were tested early, and the other half
which were tested later. She said that the differences in their
skill level corroborated what she experienced in Colorado.
4:15:04 PM
MS. OWENS, in referring to severely to profoundly deaf children,
she stated that the kids that are identified early on have many
more possibilities and options for treatment. This translates
into more job choices and more choices for the future.
DEBBIE GOLDEN, Registered Nurse and Director of Program Services
with the March of Dimes, stated that the mission of the March of
Dimes is the prevention of birth defects and has been in service
for over 65 years. They strongly stand behind early testing for
newborns. Thirty-nine states have enacted early hearing testing
for newborns, and she stated that Alaska needs to do this now.
She continued by stating that a baby should be able to be born
in Alaska and be assured of testing.
CHAIR ANDERSON announced that the entire committee present
endorsed the bill and would act as co-sponsors.
DIANE DISANTO, assistant to the Mayor, Anchorage, stated her
strong support and continued by saying her city has half of the
total annual births of the state, and [of this amount], 15
children are susceptible to being deaf each year.
DR. MARTIN BEALS, private physician, representing the American
Academy of Pediatricians, supported the bill. He then read the
following statements:
Hearing loss is the most common birth defect
1 in 3000 children are born deaf
Hearing loss has a significant negative impact
He then continued to say that the main parts of the bills that
are important to himself and the medical community is the
rescreening aspect that the bill allows. Retesting, he pointed
out, included diagnostic testing. This test moves on to further
intervention. He reiterated that all components are orchestrated
together to make mitigation work.
KRISTA GALYEN, Education Specialist, Special Education Service
Agency (SESA), announced her support for the bill. She cited
that from her experience both in Alaska and in Oregon, she could
definitely see the benefits of early testing and access to
language, both socially and academically. She pointed out that
when identification is taken away, many choices for the future
are destroyed.
MICHELLE RADIN, education specialist, Special Education Service
Agency (SESA), announced her support. She pointed out the
problems associated with hearing disorders. She described the
situation as one where the child is in an environment bereft of
environmental input, most importantly, the passive information
that is given through conversational import and social context.
The ability to interact with the external environment and being
able to have an active role in the exterior world is
exceptionally affected by sensory deprivation. Language, she
said, is the key to mitigating this deficit.
4:24:32 PM
CHAIR ANDERSON indicated the detail that she brought to her
testimony.
SUSAN WALKER pointed out that she submitted a written testimony
earlier to the committee, and pointed out that she has two
children with hearing loss, and points out that neither of them
were tested early on as newborns. She concluded that the early
testing program is critical to mitigating the problem.
CHAIR ANDERSON understood her problem and opened the floor for
the last ten minutes of public testimony.
4:26:30 PM
REED STOOPS, America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), stated
that they support the bill and that the only problem that they
have with the current language of the bill occurs on section
five of the bill. The association recommends that the
legislature require a mandated offering of the coverage as
opposed to a mandated benefit. The reason for that is that it
should be the choice of the insures to take a look at health
benefits and decide themselves how they want audio logical
testing to be covered in their package. It should, he said, be
in the employees domain of choice.
4:28:39 PM
MR. STOOPS, having passed out a list of the mandated benefits
that have legislated over the past ten years or so, then went on
to say that by taking a look at all of those coverages and put a
price tag on all of them, you can see that this is just one
factor in the increase in premium costs over time and basically
this is an elective that can be offered but not required.
[HB 109 was held over.]
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Labor and Commerce Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at
4:31:06 PM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|