An Act Concerning Patient Choice And Continuity Of Care During Health Insurance Contract Disputes.
Summary
SB 445 would amend chapter 700c of the Connecticut General Statutes to give a covered person a special right to leave a health insurance policy when a contract dispute between the insurer and the person’s health care provider causes that provider to become out-of-network. In that circumstance, the enrollee could terminate the existing policy and enroll in a new health insurance policy that offers in-network coverage.
The bill specifies that this transition must occur without early termination fees, financial penalties, higher premiums, increased out-of-pocket costs, changes in coverage, or gaps in coverage. Its stated purpose is to preserve patient choice and continuity of care when provider-insurer contract disputes disrupt access to in-network care.
Impact
If enacted, the bill would create a new consumer protection in Connecticut insurance law by limiting the financial and coverage consequences for patients affected by provider network disputes. It would affect health insurers, health care providers, and covered persons under health insurance policies, and would likely require insurers to accommodate mid-policy changes when a provider is forced out of network due to a contract dispute. The bill would also interact with existing rules governing policy termination, enrollment, and network coverage under chapter 700c.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes, the apparent sentiment is supportive of patient access and continuity of care. The proposal is framed as a consumer-friendly measure intended to protect enrollees from losing access to their providers because of disputes they did not cause. No contrary positions are documented in the available materials.
Contention
The main policy tension is between patient flexibility and insurer plan administration. Supporters would likely emphasize uninterrupted access to preferred providers and the ability to avoid being trapped in a plan after a network disruption. Potential concerns, though not documented in the available record, could include insurer objections about adverse selection, administrative complexity, and the effect on premiums or plan stability if enrollees can switch plans without penalty during disputes. No specific opposition is recorded in the provided transcripts or votes.