Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Health Privacy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
AB 82 would expand privacy protections for reproductive and gender‑affirming care; authors say it counters out‑of‑state targeting
Summary
Assemblymember Pacheco told the committee AB 82 would bolster protections for patients and providers by restricting reporting of certain prescriptions to the state's PDMP and expanding Safe at Home and anti‑doxxing protections for providers of gender‑affirming and reproductive care.
Assemblymember Pacheco presented AB 82 as a measure to strengthen privacy and safety protections for patients and health professionals providing reproductive and gender‑affirming care.
The author and sponsors said the bill would: prohibit reporting of mifepristone and testosterone prescriptions to California's Controlled Substance Utilization Review and Evaluation System (CURES) when used for care described in the bill; expand Safe at Home protections to include certain health professionals providing gender‑affirming care; and broaden protections against doxxing or harassment under the FACE Act framework to include providers and patients receiving gender‑affirming care.
Supporters — including Equality California, Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, medical associations and patient‑advocacy groups — said harassment and threats against clinics and providers have increased and that out‑of‑state actors have sought prescription and provider data to intimidate patients and clinicians. Renee Bayardo, a parent and board member of the Alliance for Trans Youth Rights, told the committee the bill helps keep private medical decisions between patients, families and clinicians and urged senators to "help keep California safe for one of our most vulnerable populations." Craig Pulsipher of Equality California said providers report threats and that expanding privacy protections would help ensure continued access to care.
Opponents and critical witnesses included CAUSE (Californians United for Evidence‑Based Policy and Law) and organizations that said testosterone is a Schedule III controlled substance and that removing reporting could risk patient safety and hamper monitoring for misuse. CAUSE witnesses argued the science around some gender‑affirming interventions is contested and urged caution about carving such prescriptions out of PDMP reporting. Other opponents included groups expressing concerns about data limits and consequences.
Committee members expressed broad support for protecting patient privacy while asking technical questions about PDMP mechanics, scope of protections and how the Safe at Home expansions would work. The author's cosponsors and health‑system groups said the measure balances access, privacy and patient safety and urged the committee's support. No vote was taken at the hearing.
