What This Bill Does
The Charlotte Woodward Organ Transplant Discrimination Prevention Act would bar discrimination against people with mental or physical disabilities in organ transplant decisions. It would stop covered health care providers and transplant hospitals from denying a transplant, refusing a referral, or keeping someone off a waiting list solely because of disability. The bill also requires reasonable modifications, including supported decision-making and communication with caregivers, when needed to make transplant care available. Its protections apply to the evaluation, listing, transplant procedure, and post-transplant treatment process.
- Bars covered entities from denying an organ transplant solely because of disability.
- Requires individualized medical evaluation before disability can be treated as medically significant.
- Defines reasonable modifications to include support networks and supported decision-making.
- Applies to evaluation, listing, transplant, and post-transplant treatment.
- Lets HHS Office for Civil Rights receive claims for expedited resolution, as appropriate.
Who This Bill Affects
If you or a family member is seeking an organ transplant and has a mental or physical disability, this bill would give you stronger protection against being turned away just because of that disability. Hospitals and transplant centers would have to make individualized assessments, consider support networks, and use reasonable modifications such as communication with caregivers or supported decision-making when those steps are needed. For people without a disability or not seeking transplant care, the bill would likely have little direct effect.
See how this bill affects you — sign in for a personalized analysisWho Supports & Opposes This
- People with disabilities seeking transplants They argue transplant decisions should be based on individualized medical facts, not stereotypes about quality of life, adherence, or independence. The bill gives them a clearer right to be evaluated fairly and to have support systems considered.
- Families and caregivers of transplant candidates They support the requirement to consider support networks, communication with caregivers, and supported decision-making because many patients can safely manage transplant care with help. The bill makes that support relevant rather than treating it as a reason for exclusion.
- Disability rights advocates They see the bill as reinforcing existing civil-rights protections in a life-saving medical setting. By tying transplant eligibility to an individualized assessment, it pushes hospitals away from blanket policies that can screen out disabled patients.
- Transplant hospitals and clinicians They may worry the bill limits clinical discretion and adds documentation burdens when deciding whether a patient can follow complex post-transplant regimens. Some may be concerned about disputes over what counts as a medically significant disability or a reasonable modification.
- Medical administrators They may argue the requirement to modify policies and provide auxiliary aids could increase administrative complexity and costs, especially in fast-moving transplant evaluations. They may also worry about uncertainty around the “fundamentally alter” and “undue burden” standards.
- Some patient safety or risk-management stakeholders They may contend that transplant programs need flexibility to assess follow-up reliability, medication adherence, and postoperative care needs. Their concern is that the bill could make it harder to exclude candidates whose care needs are not actually manageable despite available supports.
Key Implications
-
““may not ... deny the individual an organ transplant””
This is the core anti-discrimination rule. A transplant center cannot reject someone simply because they have a disability; it has to rely on individualized, medically relevant reasons.
-
““medically significant to the receipt of the organ transplant””
Disability can matter only when a physician finds, after individualized evaluation, that it is medically significant to the transplant or related services. That preserves room for genuine medical judgments while rejecting blanket assumptions.
-
““reasonable modifications to policies or practices””
Hospitals may need to change ordinary procedures when those changes are necessary for disabled patients to access transplant care. In real life, this can mean adjusted communications, caregiver involvement, or other policy changes.
-
““supported decision-making””
The bill recognizes that some patients may need help understanding information or making health decisions. This can allow trusted supporters, proxies, or other aids to participate in care discussions.
-
““expedited resolution, as appropriate””
Claims can be brought to HHS’s Office for Civil Rights, suggesting a federal complaint path outside traditional court litigation. That can matter for patients needing quick action in time-sensitive transplant situations.
Latest Status
June 17, 2026
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Related Bills
Take Action
Get more from BillBoard
Free tools to understand, respond to, and track this bill.
Ask AI about this billData sourced from api.congress.gov.