Makes revisions relating to hospice care. (BDR 40-656)
Summary
AB 161 revises Nevada law governing hospice care by adding patient-consent, notice, and rights provisions for programs of hospice care. The bill requires hospice programs to obtain and document informed written consent from the patient or the patient’s representative for all treatment and care decisions, keep those consent records for at least five years after care ends, and notify patients when claims for benefits are filed on their behalf. It also requires written contact information for the program, advance notice before a program closes or ends a patient’s care, and an admission notice explaining how to file a complaint with the Division of Public and Behavioral Health.
The bill also creates an explicit statutory right for hospice patients to receive the care already described in existing law, and requires hospice programs to explain available services and patient rights within 15 days after a patient elects hospice care. It amends related provisions in NRS Chapter 449 and 449A, including licensing enforcement language, patient-rights notice requirements, and the hospice-care definition framework. The bill takes effect for most purposes on January 1, 2026, with immediate effect for rulemaking and administrative preparation.
Impact
AB 161 expands the regulatory obligations of licensed hospice programs and strengthens patient-rights protections under Nevada law. It amends NRS 449.196, NRS 449A.118, and related licensing provisions to require written informed consent, mandatory disclosures, complaint notices, and advance termination/closure notice, while also codifying a hospice patient’s right to receive specified care. Hospice providers, patients, and patient representatives are the primary affected parties, and the Division of Public and Behavioral Health gains additional enforcement and complaint-related oversight tools.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have been broadly supported. It passed the Assembly unanimously, 39-0, and the Senate with only one dissenting vote, 20-1. The voting record suggests general agreement with the bill’s patient-protection and transparency goals, with little visible opposition in the available record.
Contention
No committee transcript is available, so specific policy arguments are not documented in the provided materials. The most likely points of concern would be the added administrative and documentation burden on hospice providers, the new notice and consent requirements, and the potential compliance implications for programs that terminate care or cease operations. The near-unanimous votes indicate that any such concerns were limited or not enough to generate broad opposition.