AN ACT relating to veteran treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder.
Summary
HB 369 amends Kentucky law governing hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) for veterans by expanding and clarifying the statutory definitions and eligibility requirements for treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and traumatic brain injury (TBI). The bill defines key terms such as “eligible patient,” “health care provider,” “post-traumatic stress disorder,” and “written informed consent,” and it ties the PTSD definition to diagnosis by a qualified mental health care provider using the most recent DSM criteria.
The bill allows a veteran to qualify for HBOT if a treating provider attests to a diagnosis of TBI or PTSD, prescribes HBOT, and the veteran provides written informed consent. It also specifies what that consent must include: a description of approved alternatives, a realistic explanation of likely benefits and risks, notice that insurers or third-party administrators are not required to pay unless otherwise obligated, and an acknowledgment that the veteran is responsible for all HBOT-related expenses. The consent must also warn that symptoms could worsen and that treatment may hasten death, and it must be signed and witnessed as required by the statute.
Impact
HB 369 amends KRS 217.930, 217.934, and 217.936, which are part of Kentucky’s statutory framework for veteran access to hyperbaric oxygen therapy. The bill broadens and formalizes the legal process for veterans seeking HBOT for PTSD or TBI, while also strengthening informed-consent and liability disclosures. It does not create a mandate for insurance coverage; instead, it expressly states that health plans and third-party administrators are not obligated to pay unless required by law or contract, leaving treatment costs with the patient absent other coverage.
Sentiment
The available voting history shows strong bipartisan support and no recorded opposition in either chamber, with a 93-0 House vote and a 37-0 Senate vote. The bill ultimately became law when signed by the Governor, suggesting broad agreement on providing veterans access to this treatment option and on the need for clear consent safeguards. No committee transcript was provided, so the record reflects consensus rather than detailed debate.
Contention
There is little evidence of overt contention in the available materials, but the bill’s structure suggests the main policy tension is between expanding access to HBOT for veterans and ensuring patients understand that the therapy is not guaranteed to be covered or proven effective. The most notable safeguards are the detailed informed-consent requirements, including warnings about uncertain outcomes, possible worsening of symptoms, and the possibility that treatment could hasten death. Those provisions indicate concern about medical risk, cost exposure, and the need to protect veterans from misunderstanding the treatment’s benefits and limitations.