Like Countable?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 2501

Should Medicaid Cover Treatment for Infants Born Addicted to Drugs and Their Families?

Argument in favor

Newborns that are suffering withdrawal from heroin and other opioids they were exposed to while in their mother’s womb should have access to treatment that’s covered by Medicaid, which will ensure they receive care.

PLD's Opinion
···
08/16/2017
Protecting the young and helpless is a moral obligation that should be met by providing the needed healthcare
Like (182)
Follow
Share
B.R.'s Opinion
···
08/16/2017
It is a shame that these infants have to suffer and, yes, they should receive treatment. But this does not solve the main problem. We really need to find a resolution to the drug & opioid epidemic.
Like (114)
Follow
Share
Kodiwodi's Opinion
···
08/16/2017
Yes. What the hell did they do wrong? Could you actually be so cruel as to cut off care and treatment because the mother was addicted?
Like (78)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

There’s no need to allow newborns that were exposed to drugs and are experiencing withdrawal symptoms to receive specialized treatment for neonatal abstinence syndrome through Medicaid.

TuckerWantsLiberty's Opinion
···
08/16/2017
This is not "Do babies need healthcare?" This is not "Do addicts need help?" This is "Should we force you to contribute more to your state's failing Medicaid program so that they can add another responsibility to that list of things for which they are unable to offer anything resembling meaningful assistance?" Everyone in support of this, why don't you vote with your dollars instead? Why waste time voting to have someone make you give money to this and just go ahead and give it yourself now? Voting yes isn't actually going to help anyone in the end. It will collapse these Medicaid programs faster and make it more painful for you, the taxpayer, in the process. This is not a solution. This is someone wanting to get press time as the politician who cares about sick babies, and erroneously characterizing the opposition as against baby health.
Like (30)
Follow
Share
operaman's Opinion
···
08/16/2017
This bill says it all. Has not been funded by Congress, so as we ponder this proposal, Why are states wanting the Federal Taxpayers to fund state Medicare? Insufficient Funds. However, I do support states funding this aid to children. But again, it's the welfare state. Oregon just passed a bill totally funding abortive service 100% with taxpayer support, Iceland has reduced Down Syndrome babies by only using abortions and now states want taxpayers to increase funding so they can place "drug babies" on SS Medicare. Is there no end to Taxpayer bailouts? Next up on the social agenda: financial support for fascist snowflake, uneducated drug addicts, black housing injustice and greater child support for fatherless children or just plain financial support to the working poor to create a fair society. The political elites can always find a way to justify their election by using Taxpayer Funds to support socialism.
Like (23)
Follow
Share
MJDalio's Opinion
···
08/16/2017
This is what charity is for. In addition where is the personal responsibility of the mother for causing this situation.
Like (12)
Follow
Share

bill Progress


  • Not enacted
    The President has not signed this bill
  • The senate has not voted
  • The house has not voted
      house Committees
      Committee on Energy and Commerce
      Health
    IntroducedMay 17th, 2017

What is House Bill H.R. 2501?

This bill — known as the CRIB Act — would allow a state Medicaid program to cover inpatient or outpatient services at a residential pediatric recovery center for infants with neonatal abstinence syndrome (i.e. withdrawal from drugs they were exposed to while in their mother’s womb) and their families. It would establish a provider type for NAS treatment centers that clearly defines residential pediatric recovery centers.

The bill’s full title is the Caring Recovery for Infants and Babies (CRIB) Act.

Impact

Infants suffering from neonatal abstinence syndrome and their families; and state Medicaid programs.

Cost of House Bill H.R. 2501

A CBO cost estimate is unavailable.

More Information

In-DepthSponsoring Rep. Evan Jenkins (R-WV) introduced this bill to allow state Medicaid programs to cover inpatient and outpatient treatment for drug-exposed newborns:

“Suffering through withdrawal from exposure to heroin and other opioids is a horrific way to start one’s life, but that’s the reality for many newborns in West Virginia and across the country. These newborns need specialized care to help them recover from drug exposure before they were even born. Lily’s Place in Huntington is making a difference in the lives of babies with neonatal abstinence syndrome and their families, and we should encourage more centers to open nationwide to treat these newborns. We can work together to cut red tape, fight the drug crisis, and ensure healthy lives for babies and children across our country.”
This legislation has the support of 13 bipartisan cosponsors in the House, including seven Republicans and six Democrats.

Media:

Summary by Eric Revell

(Photo Credit: Aneta Meszko, Marcin Meszko / Creative Commons)

AKA

Caring Recovery for Infants and Babies Act

Official Title

To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to provide States with the option of providing medical assistance at a residential pediatric recovery center to infants under 1 year of age with neonatal abstinence syndrome and their families.

    Protecting the young and helpless is a moral obligation that should be met by providing the needed healthcare
    Like (182)
    Follow
    Share
    This is not "Do babies need healthcare?" This is not "Do addicts need help?" This is "Should we force you to contribute more to your state's failing Medicaid program so that they can add another responsibility to that list of things for which they are unable to offer anything resembling meaningful assistance?" Everyone in support of this, why don't you vote with your dollars instead? Why waste time voting to have someone make you give money to this and just go ahead and give it yourself now? Voting yes isn't actually going to help anyone in the end. It will collapse these Medicaid programs faster and make it more painful for you, the taxpayer, in the process. This is not a solution. This is someone wanting to get press time as the politician who cares about sick babies, and erroneously characterizing the opposition as against baby health.
    Like (30)
    Follow
    Share
    It is a shame that these infants have to suffer and, yes, they should receive treatment. But this does not solve the main problem. We really need to find a resolution to the drug & opioid epidemic.
    Like (114)
    Follow
    Share
    Yes. What the hell did they do wrong? Could you actually be so cruel as to cut off care and treatment because the mother was addicted?
    Like (78)
    Follow
    Share
    Seriously???? It's a BABY!!! if you don't support choice then you better be supporting the baby that was born because you don't.
    Like (45)
    Follow
    Share
    The Crib Act represents the need for caring for children who come into this world challenged. As a grandparent of a special needs child I know how important legislation like this is for our society and humanity.
    Like (42)
    Follow
    Share
    Yes! This has always been covered. Nothing to debate. If babies qualify for Medicaid they qualify for treatment period. It's so funny some people seeing laws for the first time think it's new. This is a TREATMENT FOR A CONDITION that a baby is born with like a heart defect or anything else. Sorry to break it to you that meidicaid has ALWAYS paid for this if the patient qualifies for the insurance. Such a shame some of you would rather a baby scream 24/7 in withdrawal agony for days than care for the child you didn't want anyone to abort.
    Like (29)
    Follow
    Share
    This should not even be a question. They are innocent human beings who need treatment to live.
    Like (27)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill says it all. Has not been funded by Congress, so as we ponder this proposal, Why are states wanting the Federal Taxpayers to fund state Medicare? Insufficient Funds. However, I do support states funding this aid to children. But again, it's the welfare state. Oregon just passed a bill totally funding abortive service 100% with taxpayer support, Iceland has reduced Down Syndrome babies by only using abortions and now states want taxpayers to increase funding so they can place "drug babies" on SS Medicare. Is there no end to Taxpayer bailouts? Next up on the social agenda: financial support for fascist snowflake, uneducated drug addicts, black housing injustice and greater child support for fatherless children or just plain financial support to the working poor to create a fair society. The political elites can always find a way to justify their election by using Taxpayer Funds to support socialism.
    Like (23)
    Follow
    Share
    So, we're debating torturing innocent newborns to make a point? What is that point?
    Like (22)
    Follow
    Share
    Infants born addicted to any type of drug should be medically helped under Medicaid, Medicare and all health insurances. This alone, sadly, won't solve the problem. Drug addiction is a huge issue that needs to be seriously looked at and a plan of action must be set in motion to help prevent and cure it.
    Like (20)
    Follow
    Share
    Providing critical care for our youngest and most helpless is the most humane thing we can do, regardless of the circumstances. While we are at it, perhaps rather than criminalizing drug users we should treat drug use as a *medical* crisis, allowing much-needed care to be offered to those who have become hooked on these dangerous substances. As long as drug use is so cruelly criminalized (mandatory minimums, really?) those that know they need help and those that want to provide help will be unable to without guaranteeing the total destruction of their lives even before the drugs do that for them. Thank you for you consideration.
    Like (16)
    Follow
    Share
    Of course, YES. A newborn is an innocent victim. Healthcare should also cover other innocent victims, such as rape victims with no healthcare. (Update Sep 5,2017). I would like people to know that some babies are not born to addicts, but may still be addicted. My wife had spinal surgery prior to becoming pregnant. She asked to be taken off medications and provided something holistic. We saw three different specialists, including our obstetrician, whom all reviewed and agreed upon a pain plan for my wife and unborn child. Our daughter was born with a slight addiction even after titration off meds in third trimester. Our newborn was placed in NIC unit and we stayed in Ronald McDonald house for two weeks. My wife is not an abuser of medications and we did everything that was proposed by doctors. We even sought additional opinions. I had amazing health coverage for all of this. I could only hope that other families who suffer a similar experience, be covered by healthcare insurance. It is a scary, difficult and costly experience to go through. My daughter is doing well now, 4 years old and my wife is off all meds, but still lives in much debilitating pain.
    Like (15)
    Follow
    Share
    These babies didn't ask to be born and require a very high level of care and there is absolutely no reason to punish infants for their parents actions
    Like (15)
    Follow
    Share
    Caring for children if always right.
    Like (14)
    Follow
    Share
    This is a no brained. But maybe you should watch one of these unfortunate, blameless babies as they shudder repeatedly, cry inconsolably and have trouble feeding. We use non-medication maneuvers such as swaddling but this is usually insufficient. Do you really think these babies deserve to suffer because of their mothers? May God have mercy on your soul if you answer "Yes".
    Like (13)
    Follow
    Share
    This is what charity is for. In addition where is the personal responsibility of the mother for causing this situation.
    Like (12)
    Follow
    Share
    The babies are innocent and deserve the best start possible.
    Like (12)
    Follow
    Share
    Because I'm not an evil, selfish a**hole.
    Like (11)
    Follow
    Share
    Of course since infants had no choice.
    Like (11)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE