Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Intellectual Disability Definition topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Advisory council says bill change paused while DDS studies state definition of intellectual disability
Summary
The Rare Disease Advisory Council said it helped prevent an immediate change to the state definition of intellectual disability and secured a plan for the Department of Developmental Services to study and draft a state definition with stakeholder input over the next year.
Leslie Bennett, rare disease advocate and cochair of the Rare Disease Advisory Council, told members the council worked to stop a proposed change to the state definition of intellectual disability and won agreement that the Department of Developmental Services (DDS) will conduct a study and develop a state definition over the next year. "We successfully prevented them from changing the definition," Bennett said, summarizing the end-of-session effort.
Why it matters: Council members said a DSM‑5‑based definition proposed in the legislature would have broadened eligibility in ways they feared would harm the rare-disease community. The transcript cites the measure as HB 557 and also refers to a "public bill 26151"; the committee said those designations were used in discussion but did not provide an official legislative citation during the meeting. The RDAC says its advocacy produced a requirement that DDS undertake a formal evaluation before any statutory definition is adopted.
What happened: According to Bennett, advocacy members met with the human services committee late in the session to press for a delay and for a study-led approach. She said the final outcome preserved the status quo pending a DDS study. Brian (Bridal Rosen, director of state government affairs at Alexion) praised the RDAC for work on a separate governor's bill that, he said, secured a carve-out for rare disease patients around cost-effectiveness study language: "I think that's huge for the community," he said, thanking the council for its efforts.
Next steps and participation: Bennett told members DDS will lead a study and draft a recommended definition, and she asked RDAC members, including physicians on the council, to prepare to provide input during the coming year. The council plans to coordinate closely with DDS on study design and stakeholder engagement. The meeting transcript does not include a formal legislative citation verifying the bill numbers cited; the council recommended members treat the bill references as those used in the meeting and to check the official legislative record for the formal text and citation.
Context and limits: Council members contrasted the proposed change with the American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities definition discussed during debates and cited Massachusetts' experience as a comparison. The council did not take formal legislative action itself; its role, as described in the meeting, is advisory and advocacy-focused. The Department of Public Health and the Department of Developmental Services were described as partners in the forthcoming study process.
Closing note: Council leaders asked members to be ready to contribute to DDS' outreach and to participate in workgroups or meetings that inform the study's scope and definitions.
