Alabama House Bill HB433

Alabama 2023 Regular Session

• Introduced: 5/3/23
• Refer: 5/3/23
• Report Pass: 5/10/23

Caption

Relating to Opioid Addiction Treatment; to repeal the Medication Assisted Treatment of Opioid Use Act of 2019, codified as Sections 20-2-300 through 20-2-302, Code of Alabama 1975, that provide for adoption of rules governing use of buprenorphine in the treatment of opioid addiction and a standing working group to assist in drafting the rules.

Impact

The repeal of the MAT Act would result in a significant shift in how opioid addiction is managed within Alabama. By removing the requirement for the Board of Medical Examiners to create specific rules for the administration of buprenorphine, the bill may lead to a reduction in regulatory oversight concerning opioid treatment. This change could potentially affect healthcare providers’ ability to treat opioid addiction effectively, given that the prior law provided a structured approach to medication-assisted treatment. The bill's impact will significantly shape future treatment protocols for opioid addiction in nonresidential settings.

Summary

House Bill 433 seeks to repeal the Medication Assisted Treatment of Opioid Use Act of 2019 in Alabama. This act previously established guidelines for the prescribing and use of buprenorphine as a treatment for opioid addiction. It required the Alabama Board of Medical Examiners to create rules regarding dosage, screening, therapy, and necessary record-keeping, and mandated the formation of a working group specializing in addiction to assist in these processes. The repeal of this act is proposed against the backdrop of evolving federal laws and policies regarding medication-assisted treatment that have resulted in conflicts with the existing state provisions.

Contention

Discussion around HB 433 may involve concerns regarding the potential negative consequences of repealing established treatment guidelines. Critics of the repeal could argue that without these regulations, patients may face increased risks of misuse or inadequate treatment options for addiction. Additionally, the removal of the standing working group may reduce collaboration between addiction specialists and regulatory bodies, potentially compromising the quality of care provided. On the other hand, proponents of the repeal may assert that the elimination of the act facilitates greater flexibility in treatment approaches, allowing healthcare providers to adapt more readily to changing standards in opioid addiction management.