Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Health Records Access topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Rep. DeRosa seeks law to guarantee parents access to children's basic medical records through at least age 16

5571793 · July 14, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Rep. DeRosa urged the Joint Committee on Public Health to back H 2,361, which would require providers to give parents or guardians access to basic medical information for children up to at least age 16, while keeping confidentiality protections for sensitive services.

Rep. DeRosa told the Joint Committee on Public Health that she filed House Bill 2,361 to ensure parents and guardians have access to their children's basic medical records through at least age 16, while preserving confidentiality for specifically protected services.

DeRosa said the proposal stems from constituent cases in which parents could not access X-rays, notes and visits that had previously been available to them. "State law is silent on this and the provider was probably overinterpreting HIPAA," she told the committee. The bill would require medical offices to allow parents or guardians access to a child's basic medical information up to age 16 but would maintain statutory confidentiality for sensitive services such as reproductive health, gender-affirming care, substance-use treatment, sexually transmitted disease care and mental-health treatment.

DeRosa said the bill is intended as a common-sense way to ensure parents involved in care can access records that facilitate care coordination; she characterized the change as neither expansive of parental power into protected areas nor a rollback of existing confidentiality.

What happened next: Representative DeRosa asked the committee for consideration and a favorable report; the committee took testimony and did not record a vote at the hearing.

Ending: The committee will review written testimony and legal guidance from DPH; proponents said the bill preserves existing statutory confidentiality for sensitive services.