Committee adopts amendment to let providers use 'miscarriage' alongside 'spontaneous abortion' in records
Loading...
Summary
The House Health and Welfare Committee advanced HB 2‑88 to let providers optionally place the word 'miscarriage' alongside 'spontaneous abortion' in medical documents. Supporters described emotional harms from current coding; opponents warned of billing, coding and public‑health reporting complications. The committee approved the bill as amended.
House Bill 2‑88 was debated April 1 by the House Committee on Health and Welfare and advanced with amendments that make use of the word "miscarriage" permissive rather than mandatory in medical documentation.
Sponsor and supporters said the change is intended to reduce emotional harm and confusion for patients who receive medical records after pregnancy loss. "It felt like a cruel joke," said Kelly Breaux of Redbird ministries, who testified about seeing 'spontaneous abortion' on her ICD‑10 record after a miscarriage and described the shock that followed. Kristen Dunbar, a homeschooling mother and Redbird client, told the committee that using "miscarriage" in medical records better reflects what many patients experience and preserves dignity during grief.
Opponents including Alex Moody, staff attorney for LIFT Louisiana, urged caution. Moody said the legislature should not mandate clinical terminology, arguing state mandates could conflict with national coding standards and create billing and compliance problems. "Medical documentation terminology is and should be set by physicians, national medical organizations, and standardized coding systems," Moody said, adding concerns about interference with billing, claims and public‑health reporting.
Representative Barrault offered an amendment to change the bill's requirement from "shall" to "may," making insertion of the parenthetical term optional for providers. Committee members discussed implementation concerns and whether the change could be accommodated through education and clinician practice rather than statute. The sponsor and the bill's drafter accepted the amendment, and the committee reported HB 2‑88 favorable with amendments after no objections were recorded.
The measure's supporters told the committee that improving the language used in records is aimed at patient communication and not clinical practice. Opponents emphasized the risk of creating inconsistencies with CPT/ICD code updates and national reporting systems. The committee left the measure as an optional change and signaled intent to work with state agencies on technical details as it moves to the next stage.
