House panel approves bill allowing long-term civil claims over gender-affirming care for minors

The Arkansas House Judiciary Committee advanced House Bill 19-16 on a committee vote after more than two hours of testimony and questioning.

Sponsor Representative Mary Bentley (R‑District 504) told the committee the bill “will simply allow minors and patients a civil cause of action to sue dangers from gender-affirming care up to 15 years after [the] child turns 18.” She framed the measure as a protection for children and said it would prompt a return to what she described as a more cautious, “first, do no harm” approach to treating youth with gender confusion.

The bill would add a civil cause of action tied to “gender-affirming interventions” and extend the time window for claims so an affected person could bring suit until 15 years after turning 18. Bentley described the change as a remedy for what she said are increasing numbers of minors receiving medical interventions and cited concerns about long-term harms she said are insufficiently studied.

The debate turned on two central areas: the bill’s practical effect on clinical practice and whether the statutory language is sufficiently narrow and clear. Committee members asked whether routine, nonmedical acts (for example, using a chosen name or pronoun) could expose therapists, pediatricians or school staff to lengthy civil liability. Bentley said the bill targets clinicians who “affirm the self-diagnosis of a minor” and proceed to medical interventions, not ordinary acts of acknowledgment, and that plaintiffs would still have to show “irreparable harm.”

Dozens of mental‑health professionals, pediatricians and people with lived experience opposed the bill in testimony. Licensed clinical social worker Meredith Scroggins said, “Gender identity and gender expression do not cause mental health issues … it is the harassment, discrimination and stigma that create the context for mental health issues.” Pediatricians’ representative Anna Strong told the committee the Arkansas Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics opposes the bill, arguing it would add liability and cut access to care.

Multiple witnesses said broad language would chill normal clinical communication and social support for youth. Psychotherapist Michelle Clark said clinicians must “create a space of safety for all of my clients,” and warned the bill would make that work riskier. Reverend Marie Maynard O’Connell testified that her community had “weathered five suicide attempts” and said restricting mental‑health access could increase risk for vulnerable youth.

Speakers who supported the bill, including Bentley and several parents, argued current practice has shifted toward earlier medical intervention and that some people regret those interventions. Bentley told the committee she had heard testimony from “detransitioners” and said the bill was intended to let harmed minors seek redress later in life.

Committee members repeatedly pressed for clarifications about how the bill would define “gender-affirming intervention” and whether ordinary supportive care would count. Several members expressed concern the measure could deter clinicians from taking on minors who need mental‑health help. Representative Chris Hudson said the committee is not composed of medical professionals and recommended deferring to those clinicians who testified.

After public testimony and member discussion, the committee voted to advance the bill. A roll call was taken and the chair announced the motion passed. The measure now proceeds to the next stage of the legislative process.

Why this matters: Supporters described HB 19-16 as giving victims of harmful medical interventions a longer window to sue; opponents said the bill’s breadth could reduce access to mental‑health care for minors and increase suicide risk by chilling ordinary therapeutic support. The bill’s language and scope were central to committee members’ questions, and several members suggested refining definitions and safe‑harbor language in subsequent drafts.

What’s next: The committee action moves HB 19-16 forward in the House. The transcript shows the sponsor and multiple medical and advocacy organizations plan further engagement on the bill’s language and scope moving toward floor consideration.