A Connecticut woman is urging national action to prevent long-term care residents from being separated from essential caregivers during emergencies — a practice she and others describe as dehumanizing. The effort centers on the Essential Caregivers Act, a bipartisan bill that would guarantee designated family caregivers safe in-person access to residents even when general visitation is restricted. The push reflects broader concerns about resident isolation and oversight in nursing homes and assisted living settings.
Irma Rappaport of Orange, Connecticut, became a vocal advocate after experiencing firsthand the effects of visitation restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic, when her own mother was in long-term care. Rappaport and other supporters of the Essential Caregivers Act argue that allowing designated caregivers consistent access safeguards resident dignity, emotional wellbeing, and basic care needs that staff alone may not address.
The Connecticut law already allows residents or their representatives to designate primary and secondary “essential support persons” for continued in-person access during restricted periods. Rappaport and allied lawmakers now want that protection on the federal level so residents nationwide do not experience forced isolation in future emergencies.
The proposed legislation — sponsored by a bipartisan group of members of Congress — would direct the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to establish uniform safety guidelines ensuring designated essential caregivers have in-person access to residents in:
Even during emergencies that trigger general visitation restrictions, facilities could only limit access for short, approved periods, and essential caregivers would be required to comply with safety protocols to protect residents and staff.
Supporters argue this balances resident safety with the emotional and practical support families provide — including mobility assistance, eating and communication support, and general oversight of care concerns.
U.S. Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.) and Senator Richard Blumenthal have both voiced support for the bill, citing heartbreaking stories of families separated from loved ones at critical moments during the pandemic. Other sponsors, including Republican Rep. Claudia Tenney of New York, emphasize the importance of a consistent federal standard so emergencies at the state or local level do not leave residents cut off from their support networks.
Advocates such as Connecticut’s long-term care ombudsman also note the negative impacts of isolation on physical and mental health, including declines in mobility, communication, and overall wellbeing. They emphasize that many residents rely on more than clinical care — they rely on familiar caregivers who provide emotional stability and continuity of support.
For families with loved ones in long-term care, visitation restrictions can feel like a loss of agency — especially when loved ones are vulnerable or facing serious health challenges. While pandemic-era policies were intended to reduce virus transmission, critics contend that blanket lockdowns often resulted in social isolation that exacerbated physical and cognitive decline.
From an oversight perspective, family members frequently serve as informal monitors of care quality, helping notice changes in condition, communicating concerns to staff, and providing everyday support that facilities alone may struggle to deliver. Ensuring continued access for essential caregivers is framed by proponents as a resident rights and quality-of-care issue, not merely a visitation policy adjustment.
If similar measures are adopted federally, families may have:
In the absence of federal action, state laws like Connecticut’s offer one model for balancing safety and access. However, advocates argue that only a national standard can prevent variation in care experiences from state to state.
This article is based on reporting originally published by Hartford Courant on February 23, 2026,
