The Tennessee Senate on Monday passed an amended version of SB676, a bill that would require the state to collect detailed data on transgender patients. The bill now heads back to the Tennessee House, where lawmakers must decide whether to accept the Senate’s changes before sending the bill to Republican Gov. Bill Lee.
of invoice The law requires clinics and insurance companies to submit detailed information about patients undergoing gender reassignment treatment, including prescriptions, treatment schedules and demographic data, which will be compiled into a report to lawmakers. The measure also ties these reporting requirements to broader obligations for insurers to cover so-called transitional care, a provision that advocates say will ensure continuity of care.
Proponents are concerned not only with the bill’s stated purpose but also with its structure.
“This is a bill that would collect data on transgender and gender diverse patients and health care providers across the state,” Tennessee Equality Project co-chair Darron Anneliese Johnson told reporters during a speech outside the Senate chamber, according to a video shared with The Advocate. “We will ask for details such as prescription details, consultation details at the consultation, and treatment period.”
related: Tennessee lawmakers consider new Republican anti-LGBTQ+ bill
related: Tennessee House passes de facto transgender registration bill
The state said the data will ultimately be reported in anonymized form. But Johnson and other advocates argue that collecting, assembling, storing and structuring it comes with its own risks.
“The very fact that that list exists is problematic on its face,” Johnson said.
In small or rural communities with fewer patients and fewer health care providers, advocates warn that even anonymized data can become readable and reveal patterns recognizable enough to identify the people behind them.
The basis for this bill is still debated. Supporters describe SB676, in part, as a way to track outcomes and ensure access to detransition care. But critics say the justification is based on assumptions and leaves fundamental questions unanswered.
This bill is based, in part, on assumptions about detransition that are not supported by research. 2021 study A survey of more than 17,000 transgender adults found that while some respondents reported detransitioning at some point, the majority detransitioned due to external pressures such as prejudice, family rejection, and barriers to care, rather than a change in identity. Only a few cited doubts about being transgender, and many have since transitioned again.
related: Tennessee bill could create public registry of medical information for trans residents
“Are you collecting data on everyone taking hormones?” Johnson asked. “For all the definitions in this bill, those questions that are important to understanding who is covered remain completely vague.”
Supporters say this ambiguity is a point of tension. The bill is narrow in stated intent but potentially broad in scope.
The amendments adopted Monday remove certain identifying factors, including geographic details, and narrow the circumstances under which provider information may be disclosed. Lawmakers supporting the change point to it as evidence that the bill addresses privacy concerns.
But for opponents, the amendment is more like an approval than an amendment.
“Whatever degree of risk reduction, harm reduction, we’re willing to do that,” Johnson said. “But it begs the question, why do we do this in the first place?”
The bill’s House counterpart, HB754, was passed last month. If the two chambers agree, the bill will go to Lee’s desk and almost certainly go to court.
Advocates are already preparing for both outcomes.
“We need people to contact Gov. Bill Lee and tell him to veto this bill,” Johnson said. “We ask our legal partners to also consider this bill.”
Source: Advocate.com – www.advocate.com
