Maryland hearing spotlights push for universal newborn nurse home visits to reduce maternal and infant harms

Delegate Ken Kurt, sponsor of House Bill 334, told the House Health and Government Operations Committee on Jan. 23 that he wants Maryland to plan for universally offered newborn nurse home visits and insurance coverage for the service.

Kurt said the bill would direct the Maryland Department of Health to create a plan to offer a nurse home visit to every family with a newborn, noting the visits would be voluntary and that some local pilots already exist. "The nurse is not the newborn," Kurt said, explaining the program pairs a trained registered nurse with families to assess infant and parental health, link families to services and reduce stigma by offering the visit to all families.

Advocates and local officials described Frederick County’s Family Connects pilot as evidence the model can detect and address urgent clinical needs after hospital discharge. Former Frederick County Executive Jan Gardner, who helped fund the Frederick pilot with ARPA dollars, said the program produced data showing reductions in emergency room use and maternal depression. Catherine Dorsey, a mother who received a home visit in Frederick, recounted that a visiting nurse identified high blood pressure after delivery and urged her to contact her OB — a step that led to treatment. "Without Lori's care, I wouldn't have known about my blood pressure. I could have died," Dorsey testified.

Proponents cited multiple outcomes from existing Family Connects evaluations: about a 50% reduction in infant emergency department visits and overnight stays in the first year, a 39% reduction in child‑protective investigations through age 5, and lower maternal depression and anxiety rates. Kurt and others noted that maternal mortality and severe postpartum complications occur in the weeks after discharge; the committee heard that roughly 24% of pregnancy‑related maternal deaths in Maryland happen within the first 42 days postpartum.

Supporters asked the committee to approve the sponsor’s amendment to convene two work groups — one focused on Medicaid and one on private insurers — to study financing options, program alignment with existing home‑visiting services and barriers to scaling Family Connects statewide. "We chose work group rather than study to avoid a fiscal note," Kurt said.

Opponents raised privacy and scope concerns. Jonathan Alexander of Maryland Family Institute testified against the bill, arguing that universal offers of home visits could feel coercive and that the bill does not specify how medical and social information collected during visits would be protected. He warned that outreach could become conflated with requirements if communications are unclear.

Committee members pressed staff and witnesses about funding options and existing state programs. Several lawmakers referenced recent state appropriations for maternal and child health and asked whether those funds or federal home‑visiting reauthorization grants might be used to expand services. Witnesses and the sponsor said some federal and state funding streams could contribute but that Family Connects is a short, universal nursing visit model distinct from long‑term, intensive home visiting models that are prioritized in some federal programs.

The hearing record shows the sponsor is pursuing a work‑group approach this session rather than immediate statewide implementation. No formal committee vote was taken on the bill during the hearing.

Ending: The committee heard 12 live and multiple virtual witnesses on HB 334 and the sponsor said he would work with staff, the Department of Health and interested members to refine the amendment and financing approach; the committee did not take a final vote that day.