Senate committee hears wide support for SB22 to strengthen mental‑health parity and access

Senate Bill 22, a package of changes to strengthen mental‑health parity in Delaware, received broad testimony in favor Tuesday before the Senate Health and Social Services Committee, with health advocates, school nurses, unions and the state Department of Insurance urging the measure to advance.

The bill, sponsored by Senator Townsend, would require insurers to meet clear, timely‑access standards for mental‑health and substance‑use disorder care, require use of high‑quality medical‑necessity criteria, limit the use of prior authorization and step‑therapy, and require insurers to cover out‑of‑network care at no additional cost to enrollees when timely access is not available.

"SB22 takes concrete steps to prevent" access failures, David Lloyd, chief policy officer at the national advocacy group Inseparable, told the committee. Lloyd cited insurer data showing limited networks — "Blue Cross Blue Shield's network in Delaware contracts with just 7% of licensed behavioral‑health providers" — and said the bill would hold carriers accountable for timely access.

Supporters also described how access gaps affect children and families. "We need to pass SB22 to stop creating barriers to mental‑health care," Anastasia Robinson, a school nurse with Indian River School District, said, describing multiple instances in which students waited for assessments or treatment and returned to school still in crisis.

Chris Locke, co‑founder of SL24 / Sean's House, gave personal testimony about his son's suicide and urged the committee to adopt the access standards in the bill. Locke highlighted the bill's requirement that non‑urgent behavioral‑health appointments be available within 10 days and urgent appointments within 24 hours, calling that standard "a game changer."

Delaware's Department of Insurance (DOI) expressed support for SB22. Natalie DiSabatino of DOI told the committee the department helped develop the legislation and said codifying protections similar to the 2024 federal MHPAEA parity rule is important now because that federal rule faces legal challenges that could reduce federal enforcement tools.

Not all speakers supported codifying the federal 2024 rule. Pam Price of Highmark Blue Cross Blue Shield warned that the specific 2024 MHPAEA rule could "have the unintended consequence of undoing some of the important gains" and argued it might increase utilization or costs and lower network‑participation standards. That view was countered by witnesses who cited analyses from other states where similar laws did not produce premium increases and reduced denial rates.

Advocates and provider groups — including the Mid Atlantic Association of Community Health Centers, the Delaware Healthcare Association, the American Medical Association representative and the Department of Health and Social Services — urged the committee to advance the bill, arguing the legislation would translate coverage on paper into meaningful access for patients.

Senators asked technical questions about reimbursement, single‑case agreements and potential fiscal effects. David Lloyd said single‑case agreements and strong network‑adequacy standards can help secure appropriate reimbursement and bring more providers into network; Natalie DiSabatino said from conversations with insurers the change is expected to be largely operational and not to raise member premiums.

The committee took no votes during the hearing because it lost quorum and adjourned. The DOI and bill sponsors indicated additional regulatory work would follow if the bill advances.

The committee is expected to return the bill to committee consideration at a later date for further action.