Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Medical Conscience topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House committee advances Medical Ethics Defense Act after hours of testimony
Summary
The Tennessee House Health Committee voted to move HB 1044, the Medical Ethics Defense Act, to the calendar and rules committee after extensive testimony for and against the measure. Supporters said it protects clinicians' conscience rights; opponents warned it is too broad and could harm patient trust.
Chair Brian Terry, sponsor of House Bill 1044, told the committee the measure "safeguards the rights of doctors, pharmacists, nurses, and medical students to practice medicine in alignment with their moral, ethical, and religious beliefs." The committee voted to send the bill to calendar and rules.
The bill would create statutory protections permitting certain health-care personnel to decline to participate in procedures, treatments or services that violate their conscience, provide whistleblower protections for workers who assert those rights, and prohibit government entities from taking action against a provider for exercising free speech, according to the sponsor's description. Terry told the committee the bill does not apply to procedures governed by federal law such as EMTALA or to care for individuals in imminent danger.
Opponents, including Dr. Amy Gordon Bono, a primary care physician, urged the committee to reject the measure or substantially narrow it. "This bill before you today seeks to codify medical ethics in a manner that is excessively broad and as a result will have unintended consequences," she said, arguing existing Tennessee law already protects conscience objections and that the bill's broad language risks undermining patient trust and access to care.
Witnesses in support included Dr. Michael Chupp, CEO of the Christian Medical Association, who cited survey results his organization provided showing many faith-based clinicians report pressure to compromise conscience; Dr. Jonathan Shaw, an OB-GYN who described leaving a prior position after conflicts over expectations around transgender care; and Greg Chaffin, senior counsel with Alliance Defending Freedom, who said similar protections exist in multiple other states and rarely generate litigation.
Committee members pressed witnesses on details, including how the bill would interact with existing professional obligations and whether it would be used to refuse care in rural or other underserved areas. Several representatives said the bill's definitions and scope should be tightened; others said conscience protections are necessary to retain some clinicians.
On final passage in committee, the roll call showed 16 ayes, 5 nays and 1 present not voting. With the committee vote, HB 1044 advances to calendar and rules for further consideration.
Votes and next steps: HB 1044 was approved by the House Health Committee and forwarded to calendar and rules. If placed on the calendar, the full House would next have the opportunity to consider the bill.
Who testified: supporters included Dr. Michael Chupp (Christian Medical Association), Dr. Jonathan Shaw (physician), and Greg Chaffin (Alliance Defending Freedom). Opposing testimony included Dr. Amy Gordon Bono (primary care physician).
