Washington state teenagers can now obtain “sensitive” health care services without parents’ knowledge or consent

Demorat Dhingra: Believes your teenagers have rights you don’t need to know about

Washington State Senate Bill 5889, sponsored by demorat Manka Dhingra, went into effect on January 1 this year. The bill relates to “insurance communications confidentiality” for children 13 and above.

In a nut shell, children (members of a plan) 13 and older will receive confidential communications about “sensitive” health care services. The subscriber, aka parent or guardian, will not receive the “communication’ about the “sensitive” health care service. This can be related to STDs, pregnancy, gender dysphoria, gender affirming care or domestic violence.

The bill is a relatively quick read, just 18 pages. Read it here.

Excerpts from the bill:

All people deserve the right to choose the health services that are right for them, and the right to confidential access to those health services.

When people are assured of the ability to confidentially access health care services, they are more likely to seek health services, disclose health risk behaviors to a clinician, and return for follow-up care.

When denied confidential access to needed care, people may delay or forgo care, leading to higher rates of unprotected sex, unintended pregnancy, untreated sexually transmitted infections, and mental health issues, or they may turn to public health safety net funds or free clinics to receive confidential care—important resources that should be reserved for people who do not have insurance coverage.”

The applicant for health care plan means “a person who applies for enrollment in an individual health plan as the subscriber or an enrollee, or the dependent or spouse of a subscriber or enrollee.”

Protected individual means “a minor who may obtain health care without the consent of a parent or legal guardian, pursuant to state or federal law.”

Regence Blueshield of Washington offers clarification for their subscribers:

“What is this change about? Our goal is to give our members personalized communications whenever possible. Starting in January, we will send communications about sensitive health care services to members age 13 and older of Washington-state based health plans rather than to the subscriber. This is part of a new Washington state law that takes effect Jan. 1, 2020.

What does that mean? This means that these communications will go to the person who received the care if they are age 13 and older, rather than to the subscriber, the person who signed up for health insurance. Previously, explanations of benefits (EOBs) and claims for all members were mailed to the subscriber or displayed on the subscriber’s online account. After Jan. 1, 2020, all EOBs will be mailed to the member or available only on the member’s online account. EOBs and claims for members younger than 13 will continue to display on the subscriber’s online account.

Why is that important? We recognize the importance of member privacy, and we are committed to keeping health information private for any members, including minors, who might be vulnerable if it is shared.

What kind of information is included? All EOBs, whether printed or online; claims communications; provider name and address; description of services provided; any written, oral or electronic communication that references protected health information; requests for additional information from us about a claim.”

The demorats in charge of Washington are just following Communist Rule #41: Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.

h/t MyNorthwest.com

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error131
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Share and Enjoy !

0Shares
0 0 0
 

8
Leave a Reply

avatar
5 Comment authors
LolaAlmaDCGWilliameah Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
eah
Guest

I think it will be impossible to share a common polity with such people in the future; there is simply too much incompatibility — I realized this long ago, and think more will soon see it — this means either separation or subjugation — via today’s subjective morality, too many people no longer believe there is absolute right or absolute wrong — I do, and these people are simply wrong — and they must be subjugated.

William
Member
William

God forbid that a parent should be informed of their 13-YO child seeking sensitive health care services that “affirm gender identity”. I think we know what that means. He/she is not their child anyway, children belong to The Collective. As HRC said, It takes a village. It takes a village/collective to indoctrinate and break a child’s spirit. It takes parents to raise children with love and devotion and appropriate discipline to be honorable men and women

Alma
Member
Alma

Where in the hell did Manka Dhingra emerged (to rise from an obscure or inferior position or condition) from?

Lola
Guest
Lola

I know of an ER doc in Seattle whose daughter received an abortion when she was 16–without parental consent. For a week, the parents thought she had the flu, but she had a post op infection and went septic.
She was wheeled into this very docs ER and it was too late for her .
True Story. Kids cannot make medical decisions for themselves. This girl did not even realize she had an infection. Kids can’t think through medical decisions.

William
Member
William

Of course kids can’t think through medical decisions. There are legions of kids who still think they can’t get pregnant “the first time”. The story you related is heartbreaking and they are becoming commonplace. The architects of this law are utterly and psychopathically indifferent to the welfare of children. This is all about promoting their agenda of power lust and complete control