Senate Finance Committee holds bill to let people change birth‑certificate gender marker without physician attestation

The Senate Finance Committee on March 5 heard lengthy debate over a bill that would let an individual (or a parent, guardian or legal representative) request a new birth certificate reflecting a different gender designation without a licensed health care practitioner’s attestation.

Staff told the committee that under the bill the Maryland Department of Health would accept a written request under penalty of perjury and allow the new certificate to designate the person’s gender as female, male, unspecified or another (with an X displayed when unspecified or another is selected). "If an individual indicates unspecified or another, the secretary must ensure the new birth certificate displays an x," the staff summary said.

Senator Lamb, the sponsor on the floor, described the change as removing the physician attestation requirement and replacing it with an attestation by the requester: "This would remove the need for you to go to a doctor… You would sign under penalty of perjury that your gender identification is different," Lamb said in the committee exchange. He said the department currently required a physician attestation for most cases but the bill would allow requesters to proceed without it.

Other members pressed on the implications for a historic document like a birth certificate and raised concerns about potential downstream effects, including voter registration or other identity checks. One member said, "A birth certificate is how you were born. It's a historic document and record," and questioned whether the change was appropriate for that record. Several senators asked whether the bill would allow parents to alter a parent’s name or designation on a child’s certificate when the parent later changes gender identity; the sponsor confirmed the bill also allows the parent’s name/designation to be updated where applicable.

Committee members also focused on the mechanics and safeguards. Committee members asked whether changing the birth certificate would be subject to fraud penalties and noted the bill implements signature under penalty of perjury. "You're signing under penalty of perjury that your gender identification is now different," one senator said, noting the seriousness of that attestation.

After extended questioning and a mix of comments for and against, the chair asked for a hold so the committee could address remaining concerns and not proceed with a vote that day. The measure was held for further consideration; no committee vote to report the bill was taken at the session.

The committee did not adopt the bill and set it aside for further staff work and member discussion. The record shows substantial substantive debate and multiple members requesting additional clarification before a final committee recommendation is made.