Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parental Privacy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House passes HB 259, restoring parental access to minors’ medical records with narrow exceptions
Summary
The House adopted the third substitute of HB 259, requiring health-care providers and record systems to ensure parents have access to children’s medical records in most circumstances; sponsors said it protects parental rights, opponents called it government overreach. The bill passed 61–11.
Representative Mike Peterson, sponsor of the third substitute to House Bill 259, told colleagues the measure is about “the sacred right of parents to direct the upbringing, education, and health care of their children.” The bill would require health-care providers and electronic medical-record systems to make minors’ records available to parents and limit current EHR practices that deny access in some cases.
Why it mattered: Peterson said the change responds to instances where parents report they lost timely access to records (he described a MyChart example) and would restore parental ability to view records so parents can make informed decisions in emergencies and routine care. Representative Wilcox, describing his own experience, told the House: “That’s not okay,” and urged support so parents can “help make those decisions.”
Scope and limits: The sponsor and supporters said the bill preserves existing exceptions. As the sponsor explained, parental access would still be restricted if parental rights have been terminated, if access is limited by court order, or when records relate to sexual-assault treatment as cited in the statute referenced during floor debate (transcript citation read as 77 38 2 0 4). The sponsor said the bill does not usurp recognized narrow clinical-consent exceptions (for example, statutes that allow adolescents to consent to some services) but clarifies that those statutory consent rights do not automatically remove parents’ access to the underlying medical record.
Opposition and concerns: Representative Daley Provost voiced concern about privacy and parental compulsion, saying the proposal is a step too far and calling it “big government in families’ business.” Other members, including Representative Hansen, expressed unease about the state’s role in family privacy even as they acknowledged the need to protect children and ensure parental involvement in emergencies.
Vote and next steps: After extended discussion and several members’ questions, the House adopted the third substitute and passed HB 259 on third reading, 61 yes to 11 no. The bill will be transmitted to the Senate for further consideration or signature per established procedure.
What comes next: The sponsor urged timely transmittal; supporters said they expect the bill to proceed to the Senate. Any additional amendments or Senate action would be reported later.
