Tennessee Advance Bill That Will Put All Trans People In The State On Public List

[RAMROD 118,119]

Yesterday, Tennessee Republicans voted unanimously to advance anti-trans House Bill 754. Sponsored by outgoing Republican Jeremy Faison, HB 754 has been framed as a way to force insurance companies to provide coverage of “detransition procedures” if they cover gender-affirming care. This idea isn’t new: last year, Texas passed a law mandating insurance coverage of detransition care, and in Utah, a similar bill—HB 258—is currently awaiting the governor’s signature after having already passed both legislative chambers.

But speaking at a House hearing, Faison departed from the narrative surrounding insurance companies and characterized it as an individual burden as well, stating that the bill aims to make it so that “if you want on your insurance the ability to transition, you also have to buy insurance that will also pay for a detransition.” In other words, it will force transgender Tennesseans to pay for coverage of detransition care that they will likely never need—extra coverage that will unnecessarily drive up their healthcare costs.

However, this is far from the worst thing HB 754 aims to do, because unlike other detransition coverage bills, Faison is attempting to use this one for a much more sinister purpose.

The bill would establish what Faison calls a “right to public transparency” surrounding gender-affirming care, which mandates that providers “report statistics regarding all gender transition procedures” to the Tennessee Department of Health. Some of these requirements are seemingly generic enough: through a form developed by the department, a provider would be required to report “the date on which” a patient received a “transition procedure,” the age and “biological sex” of the recipient, and information regarding the prescription or surgery.

Aside from these requirements, the bill would also impose a few more. First, a gender-affirming care provider would be required to report the “state and county of residence of the person receiving the gender transition procedure.” On top of this, each form must also include the prescribing doctor’s “name, contact information, and medical specialty.” Finally, the bill also requires that providers submit “a list of any diagnoses that” a trans person “has received of neurological, behavioral, or mental health conditions.” To wrap it all up, this data will be made readily available to the public via a “comprehensive annual statistical report” published on the DOH’s website.

If this is beginning to sound like it violates trans people’s medical privacy, that’s because it does: under HIPAA—which sets medical privacy standards in the United States—providers are prohibited from disclosing any “individually identifiable health information…that identifies the individual or for which there is a reasonable basis to believe it can be used to identify the individual.” According to the Department of Health and Human Services, this is defined to include a person’s county of residence and “all elements of dates (except year) for dates directly related to the individual…including admission date [and] discharge date.” And with some exceptions, data pertaining to a person’s medical diagnosis is also protected.

The bill attempts to circumvent these concerns by stipulating that “forms required under this section must not contain individually identifiable health information” as defined by HIPAA, and Faison echoed this when he spoke in favor of the bill during a hearing last year. However, the very explicit reporting requirements make it virtually impossible for providers to comply with this section unless they interpret the definition of “individually identifiable health information” narrowly.

Doctors don’t have a choice here, either. Any healthcare professional that is found to be in noncompliance with the reporting requirements will have their license suspended for at least 6 months, and their employer will concurrently receive a fine of up to $150,000. Additionally, the attorney general would also be allowed to bring action to enforce compliance, including by seeking medical records. Conversely, HIPAA makes broad exceptions for the disclosure of protected health information when required by state law, meaning medical professionals will not face consequences for breaching it.

 

https://transitics.substack.com/p/tennessee-republicans-advance-bill?r=2a3cd0&utm_medium=ios&triedRedirect=true

[Controversiaga 17,263]

Jfc why r they obsessed with trans ppl 

[Ladle Ghoulash 55,360]

Fascist freaks. Luckily, this is fully unconstitutional, so even if this passes, it will be struck down.

[Lucas 31,602]

Just now, Ladle Ghoulash said:

Fascist freaks. Luckily, this is fully unconstitutional, so even if this passes, it will be struck down.

Who makes sure in the USA that the Constitution is being respected? Just asking because I doubt this government gives any **** about the Constitution so who can stop them? 

[TheARTPOPball 1,734]

Pls don’t roast me, but how is it inherently anti trans if insurance companies are required to cover detransitioning as well as transitioning? Both should be options. Or is the first sentence basically saying they’re making it seem like that’s what they are doing but there’s a hidden catch? 

[Ladle Ghoulash 55,360]

Just now, Lucas said:

Who makes sure in the USA that the Constitution is being respected? Just asking because I doubt this government gives any **** about the Constitution so who can stop them? 

That’s the role of the judiciary (state level and federal appointees across the country and the Supreme Court). Tennessee passed what was essentially an anti-drag bill that also functionally prohibited being trans in public, the ACLU brought a suit against the state, and it was struck down under the First Amendment by a federal judge in TN and never went into effect. I imagine the same thing will happen here. 

[Ladle Ghoulash 55,360]

5 minutes ago, TheARTPOPball said:

Pls don’t roast me, but how is it inherently anti trans if insurance companies are required to cover detransitioning as well as transitioning? Both should be options. Or is the first sentence basically saying they’re making it seem like that’s what they are doing but there’s a hidden catch? 

It’s that the bill requires hospitals to provide a public record of all the trans people in the state, in effect. Violation of medical privacy.

Edited March 20 by Ladle Ghoulash

[NUTELLA 30,915]

It's always such a comfort to find a @Ladle Ghoulash "this will never stand up in court" reply in the more demented political threads 💚

[Roughhouse Dandy 13,920]

21 minutes ago, Lucas said:

Who makes sure in the USA that the Constitution is being respected? Just asking because I doubt this government gives any **** about the Constitution so who can stop them? 

It's literally what we have 2nd Amendment rights for, but the weirdo population that loves 2A are the same freaks who support this. 

[LadyxGaGa 3,232]

dude can they fking leave us alone holy **** we are such a small minority of a group and they waste so much energy and time just trying to keep tabs??

[gagzus 25,349]

literally what hitler did to the Jews and beyond in world war 2 btw I need Americans to realise this, like there seems to be some proximity problems in other countries but people had to let hitlers government know they were Jewish or gay etc and where they lived. That’s how they used to easily round them up and exterminate them. You could also lookup if your neighbour was Jewish or gay if you wanted to. Which is exactly what this is.

Absolutely disgusting. I just KNOW straight people are gonna use this to harass and dox people and the republicans are gonna use this to discriminate against healthcare people who help trans people too.

[Lord Mayhem 3,680]

Religion rots the brain is swear...

[TheSine 6,975]

Uh oh.

[Nemo 4,414]

7 hours ago, Roughhouse Dandy said:

It's literally what we have 2nd Amendment rights for, but the weirdo population that loves 2A are the same freaks who support this. 

Really not what you want to rely on anyway

Also, that interpretation of the amendment is disputed. That's mainly what its modern advocates like to say. A historian might tell you it was about keeping down the slaves.

 

7 hours ago, LadyxGaGa said:

dude can they fking leave us alone holy **** we are such a small minority of a group and they waste so much energy and time just trying to keep tabs??

From the Rethug perspective, the smaller the minority, the easier to demonize them, with the least pushback. All the anti-trans stuff is just to whip up their base of bigoted morons, to get them to vote for Rethugs. The party is still, as it has long been, the party of the rich -- specifically, the rich who want to avoid paying taxes. They're the owners. The bigots are just the suckers, because the rich don't have enough votes without them.

[Ladle Ghoulash 55,360]

11 hours ago, NUTELLA said:

It's always such a comfort to find a @Ladle Ghoulash "this will never stand up in court" reply in the more demented political threads 💚

My compulsive need to stop online doomerism needs to be studied