Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Too Clever By Half: Commanding The Nonuse Of State Authority To Regulate Health Benefits In The Aca, Michael F. Ryan
Too Clever By Half: Commanding The Nonuse Of State Authority To Regulate Health Benefits In The Aca, Michael F. Ryan
University of Massachusetts Law Review
Prior to the enactment of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), state legislatures routinely passed laws requiring health insurance carriers to cover certain health care services or providers. At the behest of the insurance industry, Congress attempted to use the health reform law as a vehicle to reign in state-specific “mandated benefit” laws. That being said, the ACA does not prevent states from enacting mandated benefit laws; in fact, the statute expressly permits states to enact such laws. Instead, Congress created a significant barrier to continued state-specific regulation of health insurance benefits. Specifically, 42 U.S.C. § 18031(d)(3)(B)(ii) (Section …
The Aca’S 2017 State Innovation Waiver: Is Erisa A Roadblock To Meaningful Healthcare Reform?, Marea B. Tumber
The Aca’S 2017 State Innovation Waiver: Is Erisa A Roadblock To Meaningful Healthcare Reform?, Marea B. Tumber
University of Massachusetts Law Review
In 2017, the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) State Innovation Waiver (§1332) will enable states to waive many of the ACA’s provisions and to develop their own creative solutions to reign in healthcare spending. The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) was enacted to encourage employers to sponsor benefit plans and minimize potential conflicts with existing state laws. Because of ERISA, the regulation of employee benefit plans, including health plans, falls primarily under federal jurisdiction for about 131 million people. This Note explores the ways in which ERISA presents significant roadblocks to meaningful state level healthcare reform under §1332. …
Maria’S Law: Extending Insurance Coverage For Fertility Preservation To Cancer Patients In Massachusetts, Brittany Raposa
Maria’S Law: Extending Insurance Coverage For Fertility Preservation To Cancer Patients In Massachusetts, Brittany Raposa
University of Massachusetts Law Review
This Note addresses the issues related to fertility preservation treatments for cancer patients in the context of insurance coverage. As cancer survival rates improve, the ability to bear children after therapy is increasingly difficult and a concern for most patients. Currently, no states have laws requiring insurance coverage for fertility preservation treatments for cancer patients. Because it is not currently covered by either private or public insurance, only those who can pay for it on their own can use fertility preservation treatments. This note proposes that Massachusetts, as having one of the most inclusive infertility health insurance mandates, should expand …