The Assembly Health and Human Services Committee heard extended testimony on Senate Bill 257 on May 28 and later advanced the measure in work session with questions and recorded debate during the hearing.

Sen. Marilyn Dondero Loop presented SB257 as a revision of Nevada’s diagnostic and insurance-coverage rules for autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The bill removes prescriptive statutory language that limited diagnosis to certain instruments and specified providers, and allows “any provider of health care acting within his or her scope of practice” to complete an assessment aligned with a statewide standard. The measure also directs insurers to accept diagnoses rendered in accordance with that statewide standard.

Medical witnesses said the change would reduce diagnostic wait times and lead to earlier intervention. Dr. Mario Gaspar d’Alba, a developmental-behavioral pediatrician at the Ackerman Autism Center, told the committee Nevada’s average age of diagnosis is about 5.5 years, later than the national average, and said early diagnosis is linked to better outcomes. He argued that “primary care providers and other appropriate clinicians making autism diagnosis will continue to have access to specialists” and that removing prescriptive language would reduce administrative burdens and speed access to therapy.

Brian Hager, president and CEO of the Ackerman Center, said insurers sometimes reject diagnoses made by specialists as incomplete and require additional neuropsychological testing; SB257 would reduce that practice and allow timely care. Supporters included the Children’s Advocacy Alliance, Nevada Association of School Superintendents, the Autism Coalition of Nevada and multiple parents and clinicians who described waiting lists of months to years and the consequences of delayed therapy.

Opponents, including clinicians and the Nevada Psychological Association, urged amendments to define which providers qualify and to retain use of standardized assessment tools. Concerns included risk of misdiagnosis, false positives, and the possibility that widening diagnosticians without training requirements could lead to inappropriate referrals to Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) services.

During the committee’s work session the panel advanced SB257. The record shows supporters emphasized early intervention and continuity of care; opponents asked for clearer limits on provider types and for standardized assessments to remain part of practice.

Ending: The committee advanced the bill in work session toward the floor; several members asked staff and sponsors to continue working on clarifying scope-of-practice language and diagnostic standards.