Bills / H.B. 259 / Transcript

H.B. 259 Parental Access to Children's Medical Records Amendments: transcript

Everything said about this bill in committee and on the floor, speaker by speaker. Each time links to that moment in the official video. Back to the bill: summary and every vote →

Transcribed from the Legislature's recordings by software, with speakers identified from the video; it can contain errors. Check the recording before quoting anyone.

House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee, Feb 9, 2026

Rep. A. Cory Maloy (presiding)3:13:36
Okay. Everybody hang in there. We have two more. And the Petersons are gonna go real fast. Depends on the s And with that, I'll take any questions.
Rep. Michael J. Petersen3:13:48
Uh, thank you. Appreciate you, uh, putting our, putting me on your agenda tonight for just a minute. I I will go quick. This summer, I got a, I got a phone call from a, a constituent. She said, Hey, I'm, I'm trying to, uh, access my child's health records via the website. She's 13 years old, and it tells me that I have to get her consent. And I was shocked. And, uh, actually I was incredulous. I, I, I said, well, when I get home, I'm gonna go look this up. 'cause there's no way. She sent me some screenshots and I didn't, I just didn't believe her. And when I got home, I looked it up. And sure enough, if you're a minor, uh, using the, this phone, this, this, uh, E-M-E-M-R system, you can't see. You can't see the child's records. They have to give consent. Well, that's obviously a, a problem, especially here in our state. And it's actually a problem across the country, uh, um, with these medical record systems. And so, uh, what this bill does is says that, uh, if you provide a, uh, uh, a medical record system in the state to one of our providers, our healthcare providers, it has to allow parents to see their, the minor children's records. And that's the, that's the bill. Well, there, there's a little bit more to it, but that's, but that's basically it.
Rep. A. Cory Maloy (presiding)3:15:20
Thank you representative. Appreciate that.
Rep. Jason B. Kyle (presiding)3:15:22
Um, we'll go to the committee for clarifying questions. It appears there are none. I will take this as a public comment. Is anybody here that would like to speak to this Bill? Come on up.
Gayle Ruzicka, Utah Eagle Forum3:15:49
Go ahead and introduce yourself. Thank you. My name is Gail Ika. I, I am with Utah Eagle Forum. And before I tell you why I support this bill, I just have one question, and that is why every time I come to testify for Representative Peterson's bills, he's the last guy to speak. I do this every time and sit here, tell us. So next time, could you put him at the top please? Anyway, I just want to say, yes, I support this bill and of course, and I've had several of the same kinds of phone calls from people shocked about the fact that they can't access their own child medical records. I guess they let 'em pay the bill, but they don't let them get the information. So please say yes. This is a good bill. Thank you.
Rep. Jason B. Kyle (presiding)3:16:33
Okay, thank you. Do we have anybody in line? Okay, we, with that we'll close public comment and we'll uh, bring you back to the Committee for Action Representative Burton, we have, uh, two subs online.
Rep. Burton3:16:52
Yeah, thanks, Mr. Chair. I was gonna ask, uh, Ms. Representative Peterson Focus of two sub sub two? Mm-hmm. Thank You. Alright, thank you. Then I would make a motion, if I may, that we, uh, adopt second substitute of house Bill 2 59.
Rep. A. Cory Maloy (presiding)3:17:05
Okay. Would you like to speak to that? No. Okay. Take you to the committee Representative Teuscher.
Rep. Jordan D. Teuscher3:17:16
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I'm, I'm just curious about, this is a pretty substantial change from the original bill. Could, could you walk us through some of the changes and why, why you did that? Uh, yeah, because, uh, initially it was I was gonna cause the healthcare providers to fix this. Then I realized the healthcare providers are, are using systems that other people are, are creating for them. And so really the place to put the pressure is directly onto them. And, and actually I've discovered that there are several states who are doing the, some doing the same thing because they're having the same problem with this emergency, uh, uh, medical record provider. Okay.
Rep. A. Cory Maloy (presiding)3:17:55
Thank you. Okay. So We, we, we got a motion to for second. Okay. So we have a motion to adopt the second substitute of HB 2 59. Any further discussion? So we'll go to the sponsor. I'll waive Thank you. Okay. To make the motion waive. Okay. All in favor of, uh, adopting the second substitute. Second substitute, say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. So it is adopted. We are now HB 2 59. First substitute, second substitute, second substitute representative.
Unknown speaker3:18:56speaker not certain
When
Unknown speaker3:18:58speaker not certain
Clarifying question here with this substitute,
Rep. A. Cory Maloy (presiding)3:19:01
Go ahead. So we're in discussion, but make it a discussion point. Make it a discussion point. Okay.
Unknown speaker3:19:10speaker not certain
With the substitute online, it had to do with a parent or a legal guardian. What if the parent is not a legal guardian, guardian any longer of that minor child? Do they still get to have access to full? And it says full access to their medical records?
Unknown speaker3:19:38speaker not certain
Yes. And what it says though, if you, if you read the entire bill, it says that unless it's, unless the parent or legal guardian doesn't have access to the records or is not supposed to have access to the records. Okay. So they have to be a legal guardian in order to have full access or any access. Okay. Thank you.
Rep. A. Cory Maloy (presiding)3:19:55
Great. Thank you. Okay. So, okay. Any other further discussion, Representative Kyle?
Rep. Jason B. Kyle3:20:11
Yes. I move that we recommend favorably house Bill 2 59, second substitute.
Rep. A. Cory Maloy (presiding)3:20:17
Okay. We have a motion on the table to recommend favorably HB 2 59. First substitute parental access to children's medical records amendments. Second substitute. Second substitute. Sorry. Do you wanna speak to that? I'll waive. Great. We'll go to the sponsor.
Rep. Michael J. Petersen3:20:34
I would just say that I've, I've been working with for several months with, uh, healthcare providers, with the attorney general's office, and so this is, uh, this is where we've landed and I think it's in a, actually a really good place for us.
Rep. A. Cory Maloy (presiding)3:20:46
Great. Thank you. Back to making the motion.
Unknown speaker3:20:49speaker not certain
Yeah. I think it's a good idea to be able to access your kids' health records. So I think this seems like common sense. So I, I, I I support the bill.
Rep. A. Cory Maloy (presiding)3:21:01
Great. Thank you. Okay, so the motion is to pass with the favorable recommendation, HB 2 59. First substitute, uh, we'll take a roll call. Vote Representatives. Burton? Yes. Dunnigan? Yes. Matthews? Yes. Winn? No. Peterson? Yes. Roberts? Yes. Tuscher? Yes. Thurston. Aye. Chair Malloy? Yes. Chair. Kyle? Yes. Okay. The bill passes nine to one with Representative Wynn being the, uh, no vote.
Rep. A. Cory Maloy (presiding)3:21:41
Thank you very much. Thank you. Representative.

Senate Business and Labor Committee, Feb 27, 2026

House floor, Feb 18, 2026

Reading Clerk1:14:53
Second substitute House bill 2 59. Parental access to children's medical records amendments by representative Mike Peterson. This bill was heard in Business and Labor with vote 9 1 6.
Rep. Michael J. Petersen1:15:04
Representative Peterson Motion, uh, motion to circle.
Speaker (presiding)1:15:07
Thank you representative. That motion and Order, would you like to speak to it?
Rep. Michael J. Petersen1:15:11
We have a sub that's will be here any second, so we'll, we'll hold off. Thank you
Speaker (presiding)1:15:15
With the fiscal note too, I'm assuming, right. Representative Peterson.
Rep. Michael J. Petersen1:15:19
There is no fiscal note.
Speaker (presiding)1:15:21
Thank you, Representative Peterson. Uh, we'll go ahead and place the motion. The motion before is the House circle second substitute HB 2 59. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Will that motion passes? The bill's been circled. Go Madam Reading Clerk

House floor, Feb 19, 2026

Speaker (presiding)1:08:09
The motion before is the house UNC Encircle. Second substitute HB 2 59. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? No rule. That motion passes the bill's, uncircled and before the body for its consideration to you. Representative Mike Peterson.
Rep. Michael J. Petersen1:08:28
Can I make a motion to, uh, move to sub Third substitute?
Speaker (presiding)1:08:39
Third substitute. Thank you. Representative Peterson? Yes. That motion is in order.
Rep. Michael J. Petersen1:08:43
Uh, but would you like to discuss or, uh, uh, get, uh, to you on the motion to, uh, adopt third substitute HP 2 59? If it's all right, I, I'll do it with the whole, with the whole package. I'd like to try to tell us the differences between, so the body can decide the, The, the differences is that, is that, um, we're going to, in this, in this bill, we're gonna hold vendors and healthcare providers both accountable and responsible to make sure this issue gets fixed.
Speaker (presiding)1:09:14
Representative Peterson discussion to the motion to adopt third substitute on HB 2 59. Seeing none back to Representative Peterson for summation, I will waive on that Motion has been waived. We'll go ahead and place the motion, the motion before us the house adopt third substitute on HB 2 59 under Representative Mike Peterson's name, all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Will that motion passes? The bill's been substituted before the body for its consideration. Back to UF San Peterson for, uh, presentation.
Rep. Michael J. Petersen1:09:47
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, this bill is really about the sacred right of parents to direct the upbringing, education and healthcare of their children. The principle's not just a preference, it's it's actually founded in, in natural law as well as in our constitution. This last summer, I was on a hike and, uh, and I had a constituent call me and she said, uh, that she went on to her, um, MyChart account to look at her child's healthcare record. And, and there was a, a, a note up there that said, when your child turns 13 proxy access to their MyChart will default a teen unlimited unless your teen consents to full access. I was incredulous. I was, there's no way that, there's no way that, that, that, that my chart restricts what a parent can see. I had her send me some texts, some, some text, uh, or some, uh, screenshots. I still didn't believe it until I went home and pulled it up myself. And sure enough, uh, parents, parents don't have access to their children's records unless, unless, uh, they're given consent by their, by that child. And, uh, there, there are, are, you know, we do have, we do have, uh, uh, times in our, our places in our statute that says if, uh, if a child needs, uh, wants to participate in smoking cessation or, uh, STD testing or whatever, they can do it without consent of their parent. But that doesn't take away the, that doesn't, that doesn't take away the right of the parent to still have access to the, uh, to the information. So this bill says that both the provider and the, and the, uh, medical record, um, um, company needs to, needs to make, uh, data available so the parents can have access to what they are duly, uh, what is, what is by right theirs. So with that, Mr. Speaker, I will, uh, I will yield time.
Speaker (presiding)1:12:04
Thank you, Representative Peterson. Discussion to the bill Representative Wilcox.
Rep. Ryan D. Wilcox1:12:10
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of this bill. Um, I've gone through that experience myself, uh, with my own 13-year-old daughter in the last year. And we found out, I think we, I don't, I'm not sure we noticed that we didn't have access to our own daughter's medical record until we ended up at the emergency department over the holiday when I ended up at the emergency department. Then as a father with my 13-year-old who needed care immediately, I was hyper aware that I did not have access to my own child's record who was in an emergency. That's not okay. So however this happens, whatever the provider is, parents, we need to have access to our own child's records. We need to be able to help make those decisions. It's not a separate thing. We don't hand off the parental responsibility to a provider by the time they turn 13. That's not in our law, and that's not okay. So I appreciate the sponsor's good work on this. I appreciate that. He is stuck to it. He's negotiated, he's acted in good faith, and the standard across the board should be, and frankly, for the record, I think it ought to be, as long as we're paying for their healthcare, we should have records access. But this lodge just deals with 18 and under and I'm good with that. But a hundred percent we need to make this change. Please support the bill. Thank you.
Speaker (presiding)1:13:38
Thank you, Representative Wilcox discussion to the bill Representative Hansen.
Rep. Leah Hansen1:13:43
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the sponsor yield to a question? Representative Peterson, will you yield? Yes.
Rep. Michael J. Petersen1:13:48
Thank you. Yes, representative. Thank You. Mr. Speaker, is the health facility, are all health facilities private facilities, or are they state owned? These are private facilities. Mm-hmm.
Rep. Leah Hansen1:14:04
I, I am conflicted about this situation because I don't think that government has a right to, to impose on other businesses, but I understand the importance of needing to have regulatory standards that are, that actually make sense for families. Thank you.
Speaker (presiding)1:14:26
Thank you, Representative Hansen. Further discussion to the bill Representative Wynn and Daley. Provo.
Rep. Jennifer Dailey-Provost1:14:41
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the sponsor yield to a series of questions?
Speaker (presiding)1:14:44
Representative Peterson will yield to a series of questions.
Rep. Michael J. Petersen1:14:47
Yes, I will. Yes, representative Daley. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm curious if the restriction on the information available for, um, teen patients is universal, or if it's just certain medical records that a patient has or a parent has restricted access to. So parents, if you, if you look at the bill, you'll see the parents have unlimited access. Uh, accepting for, if you look over on lines 37 through 41, a healthcare facility may not restrict except for under these, uh, the parental rights have been terminated or required by court order, or the medical record relates to sexual assault in accordance with 7 7 38 2 0 4.
Rep. Jennifer Dailey-Provost1:15:32
Um, if I may clarify Mr. Speaker, I'm, uh, I'm referring to what the loss the current practice is for access, parent access to a teenager's medical records in a, in a platform like MyChart. Not what the bill is proposing.
Rep. Michael J. Petersen1:15:47
Perfect, thank you. The, the currently, this is what this, this is what is in statute. And what it appears is that the healthcare providers and or the, uh, medical record providers have understood that when, that, when state law said that, uh, a child can consent, that that was giving away, uh, the, the, the parent's right to, uh, or, or that, that that was giving away privacy. But that's not the way the statute reads. If you, if you look at the statute, it says that the child can consent without mom and dad saying it's okay to do again, STD treatment or, or, or testing or smoking cessation. It does not take away the, the parent's, uh, right to access Mr. Speaker. I'll
Rep. Jennifer Dailey-Provost1:16:34
reframe my question one more time. I apologize if I haven't been clear. In current practice, if a teenager opts does not opt in and give their parent full access, is the parents' access to those medical records completely restricted or do they have access to some information? Oh, I, I, I apologize for not understanding it.
Rep. Michael J. Petersen1:16:57
It is completely, it is. No, I think I, there is some access to, uh, making appointments and such, but the, but the medical records are denied.
Rep. Jennifer Dailey-Provost1:17:05
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And that's, that's, that was, uh, that certainly clarifies my, my experience and my understanding, uh, when my now adult children reached the age of, you said it was 13, I I remember was that it was 14. Um, my daughters and I had conversations about the degree to which they wanted me to have access to personal information and personal conversations that they were having with their healthcare provider. And we made that decision together. I don't think that we need the state to come in and demand, um, that children be forced to give up that right to privacy. That, um, that is broadly recognized as far as, um, achieving a certain age and a certain agency in one's own, um, healthcare and healthcare decisions. And I, I, I think that this is a step too far. This is big government and families business and in parenting, I opposed the bill.
Speaker (presiding)1:17:59
Thank you resident Daley Provo. Further discussion to the bill. Seeing none. Back to your Peterson for summation.
Rep. Michael J. Petersen1:18:07
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh, once again, um, 14th amendment due process rights of parents, uh, it, it is not an overstep of the state to require that, uh, that we abide by the United States Constitution. There, there really, there really isn't a more sacred right than, than than parents who have this innate desire to take care of their children and who know best for their children. And so I would urge you to vote, uh, in support of the bill. Thank you.
Speaker (presiding)1:18:42
Thank you. Representative Peterson voting we'll now be open on third substitute HB 2 59. Now, president head voting board is now closed, sir, substitute P 2 59 passed this by 61. Yes votes 11, no votes will be, uh, sent to the Senate for its consideration. Okay, representatives, can I get everybody's attention for just a minute? So as per our decorum and I think, uh, rules of fair debate and to keep everything, even if you're going to sub a bill or you should specifically say what the difference is between the sub and the bill that you are subbing, please go into detail about that. And then the body can make the decision whether or not they want to adopt the sub or not adopt the stub. Because once the bill's been subbed, then it makes it difficult if they want to go back. And so maybe the body doesn't want to adopt the stub, they like the underlying bill. So we've kind of been lax on that the last couple years or want to tighten that up a little bit. So if you're making a sub or you're making an amendment, please describe in detail what that does so the body can make a decision, uh, if that's okay. Thank you representatives. Let's go to Madame Reading Clerk

House floor, Feb 19, 2026

Speaker (presiding)1:08:38
Third substitute? Third substitute. Thank you. Representative Peterson? Yes. That motion is in order.
Rep. Michael J. Petersen1:08:43
Uh, but would you like to discuss or, uh, uh, get, uh, to you on the motion to, uh, adopt third substitute HP 2 59? If it's all right, I, I'll do it with the whole, with the whole package. I'd like to try to tell us the differences between, so the body can decide the, The, the differences is that, is that, um, we're going to, in this, in this bill, we're gonna hold vendors and healthcare providers both accountable and responsible to make sure this issue gets fixed.
Speaker (presiding)1:09:14
Representative Peterson discussion to the motion to adopt third substitute on HB 2 59. Seeing none back to Representative Peterson for summation, I will waive on that Motion has been waived. We'll go ahead and place the motion, the motion before us the house adopt third substitute on HB 2 59 under Representative Mike Peterson's name, all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Will that motion passes? The bill's been substituted before the body for its consideration. Back to UF San Peterson for, uh, presentation.
Rep. Michael J. Petersen1:09:47
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, this bill is really about the sacred right of parents to direct the upbringing, education and healthcare of their children. The principle's not just a preference, it's it's actually founded in, in natural law as well as in our constitution. This last summer, I was on a hike and, uh, and I had a constituent call me and she said, uh, that she went on to her, um, MyChart account to look at her child's healthcare record. And, and there was a, a, a note up there that said, when your child turns 13 proxy access to their MyChart will default a teen unlimited unless your teen consents to full access. I was incredulous. I was, there's no way that, there's no way that, that, that, that my chart restricts what a parent can see. I had her send me some texts, some, some text, uh, or some, uh, screenshots. I still didn't believe it until I went home and pulled it up myself. And sure enough, uh, parents, parents don't have access to their children's records unless, unless, uh, they're given consent by their, by that child. And, uh, there, there are, are, you know, we do have, we do have, uh, uh, times in our, our places in our statute that says if, uh, if a child needs, uh, wants to participate in smoking cessation or, uh, STD testing or whatever, they can do it without consent of their parent. But that doesn't take away the, that doesn't, that doesn't take away the right of the parent to still have access to the, uh, to the information. So this bill says that both the provider and the, and the, uh, medical record, um, um, company needs to, needs to make, uh, data available so the parents can have access to what they are duly, uh, what is, what is by right theirs. So with that, Mr. Speaker, I will, uh, I will yield time.
Speaker (presiding)1:12:04
Thank you, Representative Peterson. Discussion to the bill Representative Wilcox.
Rep. Ryan D. Wilcox1:12:10
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of this bill. Um, I've gone through that experience myself, uh, with my own 13-year-old daughter in the last year. And we found out, I think we, I don't, I'm not sure we noticed that we didn't have access to our own daughter's medical record until we ended up at the emergency department over the holiday when I ended up at the emergency department. Then as a father with my 13-year-old who needed care immediately, I was hyper aware that I did not have access to my own child's record who was in an emergency. That's not okay. So however this happens, whatever the provider is, parents, we need to have access to our own child's records. We need to be able to help make those decisions. It's not a separate thing. We don't hand off the parental responsibility to a provider by the time they turn 13. That's not in our law, and that's not okay. So I appreciate the sponsor's good work on this. I appreciate that. He is stuck to it. He's negotiated, he's acted in good faith, and the standard across the board should be, and frankly, for the record, I think it ought to be, as long as we're paying for their healthcare, we should have records access. But this lodge just deals with 18 and under and I'm good with that. But a hundred percent we need to make this change. Please support the bill. Thank you.
Speaker (presiding)1:13:38
Thank you, Representative Wilcox discussion to the bill Representative Hansen.
Rep. Leah Hansen1:13:43
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the sponsor yield to a question? Representative
Rep. Michael J. Petersen1:13:47
Peterson, will you yield? Yes.
Rep. Leah Hansen1:13:48
Thank you. Yes, representative. Thank You. Mr. Speaker, is the health facility, are all health facilities private facilities, or are they state owned?
Rep. Michael J. Petersen1:14:00
These are private facilities. Mm-hmm.
Rep. Leah Hansen1:14:04
I, I am conflicted about this situation because I don't think that government has a right to, to impose on other businesses, but I understand the importance of needing to have regulatory standards that are, that actually make sense for families. Thank you.
Speaker (presiding)1:14:26
Thank you, Representative Hansen. Further discussion to the bill Representative Wynn and Daley.
Rep. Jennifer Dailey-Provost1:14:39
Provo. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the sponsor yield to a series of questions?
Speaker (presiding)1:14:44
Representative Peterson will yield to a series of questions.
Rep. Michael J. Petersen1:14:47
Yes, I will. Yes, representative Daley.
Rep. Jennifer Dailey-Provost1:14:48
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm curious if the restriction on the information available for, um, teen patients is universal, or if it's just certain medical records that a patient has or a parent has restricted access to.
Rep. Michael J. Petersen1:15:03
So parents, if you, if you look at the bill, you'll see the parents have unlimited access. Uh, accepting for, if you look over on lines 37 through 41, a healthcare facility may not restrict except for under these, uh, the parental rights have been terminated or required by court order, or the medical record relates to sexual assault in accordance with 7 7 38 2 0 4.
Rep. Jennifer Dailey-Provost1:15:32
Um, if I may clarify Mr. Speaker, I'm, uh, I'm referring to what the loss the current practice is for access, parent access to a teenager's medical records in a, in a platform like MyChart. Not what the bill is proposing.
Rep. Michael J. Petersen1:15:47
Perfect, thank you. The, the currently, this is what this, this is what is in statute. And what it appears is that the healthcare providers and or the, uh, medical record providers have understood that when, that, when state law said that, uh, a child can consent, that that was giving away, uh, the, the, the parent's right to, uh, or, or that, that that was giving away privacy. But that's not the way the statute reads. If you, if you look at the statute, it says that the child can consent without mom and dad saying it's okay to do again, STD treatment or, or, or testing or smoking cessation. It does not take away the, the parent's, uh, right to access
Rep. Jennifer Dailey-Provost1:16:33
Mr. Speaker. I'll reframe my question one more time. I apologize if I haven't been clear. In current practice, if a teenager opts does not opt in and give their parent full access, is the parents' access to those medical records completely restricted or do they have access to some information? Oh,
Rep. Michael J. Petersen1:16:54
I, I, I apologize for not understanding it. It is completely, it is. No, I think I, there is some access to, uh, making appointments and such, but the, but the medical records are denied.
Rep. Jennifer Dailey-Provost1:17:05
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And that's, that's, that was, uh, that certainly clarifies my, my experience and my understanding, uh, when my now adult children reached the age of, you said it was 13, I I remember was that it was 14. Um, my daughters and I had conversations about the degree to which they wanted me to have access to personal information and personal conversations that they were having with their healthcare provider. And we made that decision together. I don't think that we need the state to come in and demand, um, that children be forced to give up that right to privacy. That, um, that is broadly recognized as far as, um, achieving a certain age and a certain agency in one's own, um, healthcare and healthcare decisions. And I, I, I think that this is a step too far. This is big government and families business and in parenting, I opposed the bill.
Speaker (presiding)1:17:59
Thank you resident Daley Provo. Further discussion to the bill. Seeing none. Back to your Peterson for summation.
Rep. Michael J. Petersen1:18:07
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh, once again, um, 14th amendment due process rights of parents, uh, it, it is not an overstep of the state to require that, uh, that we abide by the United States Constitution. There, there really, there really isn't a more sacred right than, than than parents who have this innate desire to take care of their children and who know best for their children. And so I would urge you to vote, uh, in support of the bill. Thank you.
Speaker (presiding)1:18:42
Thank you. Representative Peterson voting we'll now be open on third substitute HB 2 59. Now, president head voting board is now closed, sir, substitute P 2 59 passed this by 61. Yes votes 11, no votes will be, uh, sent to the Senate for its consideration.
Speaker (presiding)1:20:47
Okay, representatives, can I get everybody's attention for just a minute? So as per our decorum and I think, uh, rules of fair debate and to keep everything, even if you're going to sub a bill or you should specifically say what the difference is between the sub and the bill that you are subbing, please go into detail about that. And then the body can make the decision whether or not they want to adopt the sub or not adopt the stub. Because once the bill's been subbed, then it makes it difficult if they want to go back. And so maybe the body doesn't want to adopt the stub, they like the underlying bill. So we've kind of been lax on that the last couple years or want to tighten that up a little bit. So if you're making a sub or you're making an amendment, please describe in detail what that does so the body can make a decision, uh, if that's okay. Thank you representatives. Let's go to Madame Reading Clerk

Senate floor, Mar 5, 2026

Senate presiding officer8:48
Thank you. That motion to substitutes an order.
Unknown speaker8:50speaker not certain
Do you wanna explain the changes?
Sen. Brady Brammer8:52
Sure. The changes are fairly, fairly, uh, minor. Um, this, the main thing is there was a fine for a parent not providing, and I believe that that was reduced. And then there's just some wordsmithing going on. Uh, other than that, those are, that's the main, the main difference.
Senate presiding officer9:14
Thank you. Looking for discussion to the motion set. Seeing none. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Will a motion passes. The bill is substituted out to the sixth substitute.
Sen. Brady Brammer9:26
Thank you. So the, the main thing this bill does is it provides that a parent has a right to access their child's medical records. Um, there are certain circumstances where they would not be able to, those circumstances include when it's an emancipated minor or when it is, uh, when the parental rights have been terminated, or they're not, they're required not to produce them by a court order, or the medical record relates to a sexual assault, uh, or sexual assault counseling in accordance, uh, with our code. And so, um, there is a fine if the, if the facility does not turn over the medical records for a parent's child. And so with that, I'm open to any questions.
Senate presiding officer10:17
Thank you for the presentation. Looking for discussion. Senator Escamilla.
Sen. Luz Escamilla10:21
Thank you, Mr. President. Question to the sponsor. Uh, Senator Brammer, will you yield?
Sen. Brady Brammer10:26
Yes, I will. Senator Escamilla.
Sen. Luz Escamilla10:28
Thank you. So on the, just try and understand the process for protecting those, um, I think you ex, uh, the good sponsor explain what are the exceptions? Um, so a child abuse or, um, if the child's emancipated, are there specific, um, requirements for them? Do they have a timeline to show those documents? How would the facility know that that is the case and what's that process looks like?
Senate presiding officer10:56
Yeah, so Thank you. Go ahead Senator Brammer.
Sen. Brady Brammer10:59
No, I, I appreciate that. So, what the facility would be doing, so typically the facility would need to know that the parental rights have been terminated or they would need to be informed. There may be instances that the facility would not know and they would need to turn over the records, or they should by default turn over the records to the parent. However, if they were infer informed, then they would not be required to turn over those records. Now, when it comes to sexual assault counseling, there's a specific section that this then refers to, which is section 77, 38, 2 0 4. And that has its own procedure outside of this bill, but it is referred into this bill. Uh, for that
Sen. Luz Escamilla11:39
Follow up question, Mr.
Senate presiding officer11:40
President? Uh, go ahead, Senator for me. Thank you.
Sen. Luz Escamilla11:42
Thank you, Mr. President. So the fine is when the, the fine that's described in the legislation in the proposed legislation is only if the facility does not turn in those, um, records and no, do not follow the law, but if they turn them in by mistake because they didn't have the information that, you know, whatever the, those exceptions are, they're, are they still accountable for a fine at that point?
Senate presiding officer12:10
No, that wouldn't, Senator Brammer, go ahead.
Sen. Brady Brammer12:12
That wouldn't bring it into the, the fine that's discussed here. Um, what this does is it does create a presumption that a parent has access to their child's record, unless there is typically a court proceeding, which would be the parental rights of been terminated, or an emancipation, which is also a court proceeding is brought to the, to the facility's attention. And if that was not brought to the facility's attention, there's not a fine in, you know, with regards to that. But, um, if, but what we're trying to do is, is kind of flip the presumption that a lot of times the facilities just simply won't turn over documents easily to the parent of a child. And we want to, to try to encourage them to give parents their children's medical records when requested.
Sen. Luz Escamilla12:56
Thank you, Mr. President.
Senate presiding officer12:58
Thank you. Senator Escamilla. Senator Vickers,
Sen. Ron Vickers13:03
Thank you. Sponsor yield? Sure. Mr.
Sen. Ron Vickers13:05
D I'll go ahead. Yeah, just a couple of questions. Uh, one had to do, I know in the committee we talked about the, the date of implementation and the penalty, and I, I'm pretty sure I know the answer to this, but it looks like that, uh, it's moved to the end of the year of 27. Is that correct? Seven 31st? Is that, Yes, Senator, am I looking, am I reading that correctly?
Sen. Brady Brammer13:28
Yes. So it's, it's not the end of this year. It would be the end of next year,
Sen. Ron Vickers13:33
Right? Yeah. And then the fine, it was significantly reduced.
Sen. Brady Brammer13:37
Correct. And then one last question.
Sen. Ron Vickers13:40
I know there was, there was also some discussion about there are certain, uh, minors that have the ability to protect certain information. Uh, does that change that in this bill? Senator
Senate presiding officer13:55
Brammer?
Sen. Brady Brammer13:56
I, I'm, I'm sorry. I'm not sure that I fully understand the question. Do you have, uh, an i I wanna give you a good answer, but I'm not sure I maybe need a more specific question.
Sen. Ron Vickers14:09
Senator. Certain minors have certain information. Senator, I don't what, Where to go with that. Senator, follow up? I think the, the one that we were talking about is if, uh, if an indi if a, a minor was sexually active and working with the physician, would the, and under those circumstances, they had the ability to protect that information, would they still be able to protect that information?
Senate presiding officer14:32
Senator Brammer?
Sen. Brady Brammer14:33
So there's, so the code section that I referenced earlier is 77 38 2 0 4, and that is the disclosure of confidential communications. And this is subject to that. And that involves instances where, uh, the victim is a minor and a counselor believes it's in the best interest of the victim. Um, they, they have the ability to disclose it to the victim's parents if they want, but it also, the, if the victim is a minor and the counselor, um, and the minor's, uh, let's see, the, the victim is, uh, oh, it's, and then there's, if the counselor, uh, suspects any kind of, um, need for removal or protection of the child, then they can, then they would report that information not to the parents, but to, uh, the division of Child Welfare services.
Sen. Ron Vickers15:27
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you.
Senate presiding officer15:29
Senator Vickers. Senator Plumb, and then Senator Cullimore. Senator. Senator Cullimore.
Sen. Cullimore15:41
Yeah. Thank you President. And so, I, I apologize, I missed part of the presentation on the sub six, but some concerns I heard about this bill earlier in the session are that it poses liability, which I, I think we all agree that the intent of this bill is, is worthy a worthy goal of the bill. The concern is that sometimes the, uh, the operating systems that, that, uh, hospital systems or healthcare systems are using, uh, makes it difficult to do this. And wondering how that liability applies. I think, I think the intent of many hospital systems that I'm hearing from and, and healthcare systems that they, that they would like to, to provide these services, but their concern is that, you know, some of it's outside of their, outside of what they're doing, and they can only push their vendors so fast. And so just, just wondering about enforcement and timing on this and, and how that liability trickles down. Sure.
Senate presiding officer16:36
So Senator Brammer, go
Sen. Brady Brammer16:37
Ahead. Yeah, what we're trying to create is the ability for a parent to get, get quick access to their med, to their child's medical records. Now, I think the vendor concern has been largely addressed by the really substantially delayed implementation date. So this does not, while the effective date of the bill is May 6th, the implementation date for the, for the vendors that this would apply to is not even the end of this year. It's the end of next year. That's one of the longest tail implementation dates that I've seen in a bill. And that's really to address this question. And so, you know, at some point, um, yes, uh, it may, uh, you know, at some point it may be a little bit difficult to reprogram a vendor's capabilities, but at the same time, December 31st, 2027 is quite a ways away. And, and so I mean, we're, we're talking about o over 20 months away from, from right now. And so we're giving a really long runway for these vendors to get to be able to come into compliance.
Senate presiding officer17:41
Thank you. Now to Senator Plumb.
Sen. Jen Plumb17:44
Thank you, Mr. President. I, I have some concerns that we may be putting ourselves in, um, kind of contradiction with federal law on some pieces of this. I know, for example, if there's a case where, uh, there's a child that's in a situation where there's concern about abuse, either from one or both parents, that the health system does have the ability, and some may even say the obligation to block that from being accessed by the parent for the child's safety. Has there been any dialogue about this being incongruent with the federal expectations and regulations that we have?
Sen. Brady Brammer18:22
Yeah, so there was actually a lot of dialogue about making sure that we were still in compliance. Um, at one point there was, there's, there's no federal regulation as to that point. There's no federal, uh, statute as to that point. What has been pointed to is a letter that was once sent that indicated that might be an interpretation that could be had. And we had our legal expert, who was a law professor in Illinois, look at that pretty intensely. And she felt that the bigger problem was the 14th amendment right of a parent to know what is happening to their child. And we recently saw that in the, where our Supreme Court just overturned the Transgender Disclosure Rule in California, where they were not allowing parents to know that their children were being transitioned in California schools. And they did so under the 14th Amendment. And I'm telling you, what we are seeing is that, you know, the, the refusal to disclose to parents information that is pertinent to their children is a much bigger legal liability liability than, than the concerns of over disclosing. And there are lots of other protections in place where absolutely they should be reporting to the division of Child and Family Services. Absolutely, they should be, you know, the guardian ad litem should be applying to courts for, uh, for orders not providing, uh, not providing that. But that is the exception, not the rule. And what's happening now is they've turned that exception into the rule and denied parents access to their children's medical records. And we're trying to get that flipped.
Sen. Jen Plumb20:11
If I, if I may follow up. Go ahead.
Unknown senator20:13speaker not certain
Uh, it's, it's an interesting, um, pathway. I, I think I know the doctor or the, the loyal legal expert in Illinois. I think they testified in another committee that, um, I was on, uh, I I just, of all the things that I've seen in my career, I've seen, I, I hate to even count the dozens if not hundreds of abuse victims and, and the situations that they're put into custody scenarios, all sorts of things right there. There's, there's very, very messy scenarios and sometimes maybe there is, um, when it comes to kids, the arc of wanting to protect, um, at least for someone like myself in, in a clinical space, the arc of wanting to protect the child at, at the absolute core of what we do. And in my 30 plus years now of being in medicine 25 in practice, I have never heard of or seen a case of an, of a child going through any sort of gender affirming care. And so I think that as we have this dialogue, part of the consideration is, um, what's actually really happening to children and, and what is unfortunately happening to children is they're being put at risk. And I worry that this policy would potentially further put them at risk. So thank you for allowing me to add that to the dialogue.
Senate presiding officer21:34
Senator Ipson?
Sen. Ipson21:37
Thank you, Mr. President. I want to commend the, the sponsors of this bill for working with the stakeholders. They were, they changed the implementation date, like the good senator stated a few minutes ago. They pushed it out a long way. They were ag agreeable to that as well as reducing the, the daily fine considerably and make making this more palatable to the stakeholders. And I commend them for their willingness to do that. I'm in favor of this bill.
Senate presiding officer22:16
Senator Brammer, I'm going to you for summation and a motion.
Sen. Brady Brammer22:19
Yeah. And, and while, while I, um, I just, I just want to be clear, this is not a bill that is, that is necessarily centered on anything related to transgender. That's the example from a recent Supreme Court case that I was using to affirm the principle that the 14th Amendment protects the parents' right to know what's happening to their child, what's happened to their child, and see the records related to their child. Now, nor do I believe that this bill does anything to remove the protective ability of a hospital or healthcare providers to protect children by turning over, uh, important evidence and giving tips to those who believe that child abuse has occurred. This is not intended in any way to degrade that process, but what this is intended to do is to make it the default that a parent has a right to their child's medical records. And with that, I will call the question. Thank you.
Senate presiding officer23:16
Thank you. And the question is under suspension of the rule, shall sixth, the substitute house Bill two fifty nine pass. Roll call vote.
Senate clerk23:24
Senator Vickers, Baldy Aye. Lein Ramer Aye. Bus Comore. Senator Colmore. Senator Cullimore Aye. Senator Escamilla Gilmore. Grover Harper Aye. Kinins Aye. Ipson Aye. Johnson. Aye. Juab McKay? Aye. Mikel Milner Aye. Musman Owens Aye. Pitcher? Um, no. Rebe, no sandal. Aye. Stevenson Aye. Bratton Aye. Vickers. Weiler Wilson. Aye. Winterton Aye. Senator Bus Aye. B Adams Aye.
Senate presiding officer24:34
Sixth substitute house bill 2 59. Having received 22 yay votes, six nay votes, one being absent, passes this body and will be returned to the house for further consideration. Thank you. Senator Brammer. Second substitute house Bill 4 98, Second substitute house Bill 4 98 Utah App Store Accountability Act Amendments. Senator Weiler, Senator ml, Motion circle. Motion to circle. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Rule that motion passes. The bill is circled.

House floor, Mar 6, 2026

Unknown speaker17:08speaker not certain
The president meeting Clerk Sixth substitute house bill 2 59. Parental access to children's medical records amendments by representative Mike Piute, Representative Peterson.
Rep. Michael J. Petersen17:23
Good morning and thank you Mr. Speaker. Uh, I make a motion that we adopt the, uh, that we concur with the Senate amendments.
Speaker (presiding)17:32
Great. That that motion is in order. Would you like to speak to that representative?
Rep. Michael J. Petersen17:35
I would thank you. Uh, we, there're just, uh, really three simple things that we did. One is that we, uh, said that it, so there's some fines associated with not complying with the need to, uh, show the parent or show the child the child's records. We moved them from $10,000 a day to $1,000 a day. Then we moved that, uh, instead of per facility because, uh, some, some of our companies have 150 facilities that would've been, uh, a ginormous un undoable thing. So it's per per health system. And then we, uh, reduce the, oh, then we, uh, change the compliance date out another year. So three simple things.
Speaker (presiding)18:23
Thank you. Representative discussion to the motion to concur with the Senate amendments on six substitute HB 2 59 C none. Back to your Representative Peterson for summation. Thank
Rep. Michael J. Petersen18:35
You. I'll, I'll, I'll
Speaker (presiding)18:35
Waive. Thank you. Summation then waived. Go and place the motion. All in favor of concurring with the Senate amendments on six. Substitute HB 2 59. Say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Will that motion passes? Voting will now be open for final passage. Seeing all president having voted voting now closed six. Substitute HB 2 59 passed this body with 56 yes votes. 14 no votes will be sent to the Senate for the signature of the president. Madam Meeting Clerk