OBGYN: My patients' health and wellbeing will be endangered by NC House bill
Earlier this month, the North Carolina House of Representatives passed House Bill 519, also known as the 'Parents' Medical Bill of Rights.' As a board certified OBGYN who treats minors, I am deeply concerned about the implications of this bill. This legislation, which aims to revise the laws regarding minors' consent to medical treatment and parental access to medical records, poses significant risks to the health and wellbeing of patients across the state.
HB 519 will impede the trust young patients have in their medical providers and therefore undermine the confidentiality of their care. Currently, North Carolina law allows minors to consent to treatment for sexually transmitted infections (STIs), pregnancy, substance abuse, and mental health issues without parental involvement. This provision is crucial for ensuring that young patients feel safe seeking medical help without fear of judgment or repercussions from their parents.
By mandating parental consent for these sensitive treatments, the bill risks deterring minors from seeking necessary medical care. This could lead to untreated STIs (which can lead to future infertility), unaddressed mental health issues, and unintended pregnancies, all of which have serious long-term consequences for our young North Carolinians' health and wellbeing.
The trust between patients and healthcare providers is foundational to effective medical care. Confidentiality is a cornerstone of this trust, particularly for minors who may be navigating complex and sensitive health issues. HB 519 threatens to erode this trust by introducing parental oversight into the patient-provider relationship. Healthcare providers may find themselves in difficult positions, having to balance the legal requirements of HB 519 with our ethical duty to protect patient confidentiality.
Advocates for HB 519 argue that the exclusion of parental consent in our current laws leaves children to navigate serious medical situations alone. This perspective completely ignores the role that healthcare providers like myself play in the navigation of these issues. We do not leave our young patients 'alone' to navigate their medical decisions, but instead provide thoughtful guidance, including often suggesting the involvement of their parent(s) in their medical care. Unfortunately, for some of my young patients, their medical team members are the only trusted adults in their lives, and if they are required to obtain parental consent to seek treatment, they simply will not do so.
House Bill 519, while ostensibly aimed at empowering parents, poses significant risks to the health and wellbeing of minors in North Carolina. By undermining confidentiality, creating barriers to mental health and reproductive care, and hindering substance abuse treatment, the bill jeopardizes the autonomy and safety of young patients. As a physician who treats young patients, I urge the lawmakers to reconsider the implications of HB 519 and prioritize the health and rights of minors in our state.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Yahoo
Hakeem Jeffries Breaks House Record With Speech Bashing Trump's Tax Bill
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries spoke for eight hours and 44 minutes on the House floor on Thursday, in a marathon speech delaying the passage of = Donald Trump's Medicaid-and-food-assistance slashing, tax-gift-for-the-wealthy abomination of a reconciliation bill. The speech breaks the record for longest ever delivered on the House floor, previously held by former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy. Jeffries spent much of his hours-long 'magic minute' speech reading statements, letters, and stories from individuals who have benefited from Medicaid and other programs, or have written in opposition to the legislation's cuts to the federal health care program for the disabled and poor. 'Donald Trump's deadline may be Independence Day. That ain't my deadline,' Jeffries said of the president's demand that the bill be sent to his desk for signature by the Fourth of July. 'We don't work for Donald Trump. We work for the American people. That's why we're right here now, on the floor of the House of Representatives, standing up for the American people.' The people are being set up to suffer, as Jeffries highlighted. 'People will die. Tens of thousands, perhaps year after year after year, as a result of the Republican assault on the healthcare of the American people,' he said. 'I'm sad. I never thought that I'd be on the House floor saying this is a crime scene. And House Democrats want no part of it.' Republicans dismissed the stalling tactic, which will only delay the House's final passage of the bill through Congress. 'The sooner we get this done, the better,' House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said Thursday. 'If Hakeem Jeffries would stop talking, we could deliver relief for the American people.' 'It's an utter waste of everyone's time, but you know, that's part of the system here,' Johnson told reporters. 'We'll land this plane before July Fourth.' While Jefferies is making the GOP wait to take their victory lap, the majority of the delays related to the bill's passage have stemmed from disagreements within Johnson's own party. On Wednesday night, another record was broken in the House when Republicans forced the longest vote in the history of the lower chamber, holding a rule vote open for seven hours while they attempted to browbeat the party's deficit hawks into submission. While Johnson may consider a lengthy speech a waste of his time, the over 11 million American who may lose health care as a result of the bill's Medicaid cuts would hope that their elected representatives delay passage as long as possible. Unfortunately for those affected, delay was all Jeffries' speech did, and the Democratic Party's accomplishments in the early months of Trump's second term haven't amounted to much more than symbolic theatrics. More from Rolling Stone One Minute Is Missing From the Epstein Video. Conspiracy Theorists Are Losing Their Minds Trump Maybe, Finally Realizes Putin Has Been Playing Him 7 Overlooked Provisions in Trump and the GOP's Ugly Tax Bill Best of Rolling Stone The Useful Idiots New Guide to the Most Stoned Moments of the 2020 Presidential Campaign Anatomy of a Fake News Scandal The Radical Crusade of Mike Pence
Newsweek
5 days ago
- Newsweek
Trump's Favored Pollster Advises Republicans to Adopt Obamacare Policy
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The GOP pollster used by President Donald Trump during some of his presidential campaigns found that swing-district Republicans can boost their standing ahead of the midterms by supporting a key measure of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as Obamacare. Why It Matters Republicans are hoping to thwart losses in the 2026 midterm elections as President Donald Trump's approval rating has taken hits in recent public opinion surveys. Historically, the party in the White House suffers losses during their first midterm. During Trump's first midterm in 2018 for instance, Democrats picked up 41 seats in the House of Representatives. Healthcare is likely to be a major issue ahead of the midterms, especially following Medicaid cuts in Trump's "One Big Beautiful Bill Act." A new survey from Trump pollsters Tony Fabrizio and Bob Ward found that Republicans in the most vulnerable districts may be able to build support among voters by adopting the premium tax credit, one part of the ACA, which has been generally opposed by Republicans since its inception in 2010. What to Know The poll asked voters in 28 swing districts, which were evenly divided in 2024, whether they would support a generic Democrat or Republican, and found Democrats up by three. Among highly motivated voters, Democrats were up seven. But it found that supporting the extension of the premium tax credit, set to expire at the end of 2025, is one way Republicans could win back support. The tax credit allows lower-income Americans to purchase healthcare in the ACA marketplaces and obtain healthcare coverage. "Republicans can position themselves ahead of Democrats in these districts by extending the premium tax credit and using the individual market as a landing spot for working age adults on Medicaid," the poll report, first reported by Politico, reads. Health care activists rally in Washington, D.C. on September 26, 2017. Health care activists rally in Washington, D.C. on September 26, found that Republican candidates who support that policy would lead Democrats by six points overall and by four points among the most motivated voters. Seventy-nine percent of respondents, including 68 percent of those who voted for Trump, supported tax credits "that make it more affordable for working families and individuals to purchase health insurance directly through or state exchanges," the poll found. The poll, notably, did not use the terms "Affordable Care Act" or "Obamacare" in its questioning. If the tax credit is not extended, Republicans could pay a price, the poll found, as the three-point deficit would expand to a 15-point deficit. Republicans can also "benefit" by using the tax credit as a "landing spot for working aged Medicaid enrollees.". The poll surveyed 1,000 registered voters from June 7 to July 10, 2025, and had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points. Congressional Republicans have opposed the ACA and sought to repeal it during Trump's first term, but those efforts were blocked by GOP Senators Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski and John McCain. Fabrizio worked as Trump's 2024 pollster and has previously issued warnings to the GOP about voter concerns around the economy and healthcare. Newsweek reached out to Fabrizio Ward for comment via the firm's contact form. What People Are Saying The poll report noted: "Unlike recent changes to Medicaid which do not go into effect until after the midterm elections, voters on the individual insurance marketplace, who voted for Trump by 4-points, will begin getting notices of significant premium hikes this fall. The incentive is to act on extending the tax credit soon." A Peterson-KFF report from June said: "The enhanced premium tax credits are now set to expire at the end of 2025. Unless the premium tax credits are extended, consumers can expect increases in both the net premium payments and gross premiums." What Happens Next Whether or not the GOP-controlled Congress will vote to extend the tax credits remains unclear at this point. Republicans in these key districts are already facing criticisms from Democrats over healthcare ahead of the midterms.
Fox News
12-07-2025
- Fox News
The Doctor was in (and out): Biden's physician invokes Fifth Amendment during deposition
Dr. Kevin O'Connor made a house call this week. Specifically to the House of Representatives. O'Connor served as President Biden's physician. The House Oversight Committee wanted to talk to O'Connor about whether Biden was fit to serve as president. So House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., issued a subpoena for O'Connor. The doctor was in. But not for very long. After 20 minutes behind closed doors with Comer and company, the deposition concluded. Committee attorneys peppered O'Connor with questions about whether he thought former President Biden was up to the job and if he was asked to lie about the commander in chief's health. But Comer got the same response each time. Even when committee lawyers posed a simple question, asking O'Connor if he understood the proceedings. O'Connor deployed his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination each time. The committee even took the rare step of releasing a video from most of the deposition the same evening. "Most people invoke the Fifth when they have criminal liability. And you know, that's what it would appear (to be) on the surface here," said Comer after the deposition concluded. "The American people have a right to know the health condition of the president. Both physical and mental." Comer observed that O'Connor's silence "adds more fuel to the fire that there was a cover-up." Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Tex., was the only Democrat who showed up for the deposition. Crockett just bowed out a few weeks ago from a bid to become the top Democrat on the Oversight Committee after the death of late Rep. Gerry Connolly, D-Va. "It was important to make sure that a Democrat was in the room. Because unfortunately, sometimes people like to cherry pick and make sure that they can give whatever fits their narrative," said Crockett. But the video revealed O'Connor repeatedly citing the Fifth Amendment "on the advice of counsel." That's why Comer hoped to shape one narrative about the health of former President Biden. Comer also suggested the potential lengths that O'Connor was willing to go to in order to protect the former president. And perhaps himself. Crockett was incredulous at Comer's assertions. "It's kind of astounding to hear someone say, if you invoke the Fifth Amendment, that is only because you are guilty," said Crockett. "(Republicans) have been very good at rallying people up and getting them emotional because they don't fully understand some of our processes." Crockett added that patients "have the right to confidentiality when it comes to your health care." The Department of Justice has launched an investigation into the use of the autopen by Biden. O'Connor's lawyers say that led their client to exercise his Fifth Amendment rights. "We want to emphasize that asserting the Fifth Amendment privilege does not imply that Dr. O'Connor has committed any crime," said his legal team. And the statement also indicated there was concern about O'Connor keeping medical information of the First Patient in confidence. "The Committee has indicated that it will demand that Dr. O'Connor reveal, without any limitations, confidential confirmation regarding his medical examinations, treatment and care of President Biden," read the statement. "Revealing confidential patient information would violate the most fundamental ethical duty of a physician." His attorneys went on to say that O'Connor could face "civil liability" and "revocation" of his medical license. Regardless, O'Connor wasn't answering any questions anywhere. Inside the meeting room. Heading to the meeting room. Or heading home. "Will you invoke the Fifth? What about patient doctor confidentiality?" yours truly asked O'Connor as he navigated a third-floor hallway in the Rayburn House Office Building with a small coterie of attorneys. "Do you think (President Biden) was up to the job? Do you think he was up to serve?" No response. O'Connor reprised his reticence on the way out. "Did you take the Fifth because you're trying to cover up what the President's state was?" I asked as he departed down a Rayburn stairwell. Nothing. The statement from the physician's counsel declared that the pact between doctors and patients "require that Dr. O'Connor refuse to testify." This is a question which vexes even doctors who double as lawmakers. Such is the case with Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan. He's an OB-GYN. "I can see both sides of it. I can certainly see, as a physician, you take an oath of confidentiality with every patient. If there's a national security issue, does that outweigh that relationship?" pondered Marshall. "I would really have to think about that. I want to get a couple of consults myself and talk to some constitutional lawyers." But aside from the Constitutional, ethical and medical questions, Democrats reverted to defending the former president. I asked Crockett if she ever perceived health problems with the president. "No. None. No. None. I had none. Now, granted, I didn't see Joe Biden every single day. But I did have an opportunity to interact with the president. I never had a concern," said Crockett. "He may get fumbled up by words. But that's not anything new. And it's not anything that (didn't come) with age." There had been discussion about getting O'Connor to cooperate without a subpoena. Comer contends his investigation isn't about plowing some of the same Biden political fields explored a couple of years ago when it was thought the former president might seek a second term. This isn't about business dealings or Burisma or "influence peddling." But Comer is posing a legitimate question here about the fitness of a president. Any president. Regardless of what Crockett says, there are plenty of questions about Mr. Biden's acuity and whether staff made decisions – in lieu of the president. And these questions aren't new when it comes to presidential health. President Woodrow Wilson suffered a stroke during his time in office. Historians believe First Lady Edith Wilson made decisions on behalf of the president. Questions lingered about President Ronald Reagan. And the Washington press corps was complicit hiding the infirmaries of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt from the public in an era before television and social media. The committee wheels in other former Biden figures in the coming days. That includes former Biden Chief of Staff Ron Klain and Anthony Bernal, a top aide to former First Lady Jill Biden. Because of patient-doctor confidentiality, we may never know O'Connor's true analysis of former President Biden. It's a problem because the public deserves to know if the commander in chief is up to the job. But there's a special relationship between a patient and their doctor. The question is whether issues of national security and the administration of government outweigh those private rights.
