Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Patient Communications topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances bill to add 'miscarriage' alongside 'spontaneous abortion' in medical records
Summary
After emotional testimony from people who said clinical coding caused additional trauma, the Senate Health and Welfare Committee reported House Bill 288 favorable. Advocates urged patient-facing language; witnesses noted CPT coding limits and suggested state-level patient notices as an interim fix.
The Senate Health and Welfare Committee on May 13 voted to report House Bill 288, a measure asking that the term "miscarriage" be placed alongside "spontaneous abortion" in medical documentation and communication to reduce distress for patients and families.
Representative Boyer, the bill's sponsor, said the change is a small but meaningful step to make medical records less emotionally painful for people who experienced pregnancy loss. "House Bill 288 simply asks that the term miscarriage be placed alongside spontaneous abortion in medical documentation and communication," he said, arguing the language helps patients better understand their diagnosis.
Several witnesses offered personal testimony. Yvette Buller described two stillbirths and said finding the clinical label in her records felt like "another wound" after the trauma of losing her children. "These were not abortions in the way that the word is commonly understood," she said.
Kelly Breaux, who runs a local bereavement ministry, described seeing clinical codes such as "spontaneous" and "missed abortion" in patient portals and said that for many women, those words cause confusion and anguish. "Doctors no longer speak this way to women at the bedside, yet within medical coding miscarriage is still classified using abortion terminology," she said.
Testimony and stakeholder discussion noted a practical constraint: CPT and other coding standards are set at the federal and international level, which limits the extent to which a state can change billing codes. Ben Clapper of Louisiana Right to Life suggested adding patient-facing explanatory language in records or a separate notice as an alternative while federal coding is addressed.
Committee members and witnesses said the change could be pursued at state and federal levels simultaneously; the sponsor said he is already seeking parallel action in the congressional delegation. The committee reported the bill favorable by voice vote (no recorded opposition). The measure was described as subject to further drafting to balance federal code constraints and state-level patient communication solutions.
Where it stands: HB 288 was reported favorable; committee members suggested working with the Department of Health and the sponsor to craft patient-focused language and evaluate whether a supplemental notice or guidance could be implemented prior to any change to CPT coding.
