Montecito resident Denice Spangler Adams is concerned about government outreach in some of the legislation being endorsed by the California Legislative Women’s Caucus.
Denice Spangler Adams
The author lives in Montecito
When will ridiculous government mandates and requirements end? When will Californians stop forcing their beliefs/ faith/ideology on others?
Shame on the California Legislature Women’s Caucus for introducing 12 of 15 bills to expand state control that include no exemptions for local governments, school boards, private employers or residents.
Please make time to oppose two newly introduced bills:
1) Assembly Bill 598 (sponsored by Assemblymember Buffy Wicks, D-Oakland) requires all California public school districts to survey all seventh through 12th graders under the California Healthy Kids Survey and requires student participation! This is unlawful!
Surveying students is not the role of schools. Requiring student participation is a violation of their constitutional rights, the California Education Code, student and parent rights to privacy, and freedom of participation while captive on campus.
Schools must stick to academics, vocational training and instruction.
We must demand local control of our public school districts by our elected trustees. Push back.
2) Assembly Bill 1432 requires all insurance coverage in California to cover gender affirming care, abortions. California employers and California residents must demand the right to have options in insurance coverage or no coverage. This is another example of overreach.
I write as a lifelong advocate of medical autonomy, privacy, freedom of individual choice, and not wanting to pay for the choices of others. As a local Planned Parenthood director in the 1980s, I advocated for teen opportunities to learn from qualified medical instructors to get questions answered. The religious community supported my efforts.
I understand and support the need for every resident to have access to reproductive medical information and care.
As a gerontologist, I worked years for the right to Death with Dignity, end-of-life care; for each person’s needs and written wishes to be honored; and for no licensed medical professional to be mandated or coerced to provide medical intervention.
I do not support government overreach, dictates, mandates, control or violations of constitutional rights. Dogma from both the right and left certainly fuels voter registration of No Party Preference locals and is divisive.
I encourage tolerance.
Please note: Assembly Bills 352, 793 and1194 address in some form the California Privacy Rights Act protections of electronic, digital data sharing of medical records and/or internet searches.
Here is a list of 25 bills being considered in the Legislature and their sponsors.
— AB 90 (Petrie-Norris): Improves access to long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) for those seeking abortion services.
— AB 254 (Bauer-Kahan) Adds CMIA/HIPAA protections for data collected by menstrual, fertility, and sexual health apps and websites.
— AB 352 (Bauer-Kahan) Enhances privacy protections for medical records related to abortion, pregnancy loss, and other sensitive services through electronic health record sharing and health information exchanges.
— AB 571 (Petrie-Norris) Ensures that medical malpractice insurance includes coverage for comprehensive sexual and reproductive health care.
— AB 576 (Weber) Aligns Medi-Cal coverage of medication abortion with evidence-based clinical guidelines.
— AB 598 (Wicks) Requires school districts to participate in the California Healthy Kids Survey and include a module on sexual and reproductive health care as one of the core survey modules.
— AB 710 (Schiavo) Launches a public information campaign to provide women with accurate information regarding access to abortion care at crisis pregnancy centers.
— AB 793 (Bonta) Provides privacy protections for digital data related to patients accessing abortion services in California.
— AB 1194 (Carrillo) Ensures that California Privacy Rights Act protections always extend to accessing, procuring, or searching for services regarding contraception, pregnancy care, and perinatal care, including abortion services.
— AB 1432 (Carrillo) Requires every health insurance policy or certificate that is issued, or delivered to a resident of California, regardless of the situs of the contract, to comply with California laws that require coverage of abortion services and gender-affirming care.
— AB 1481 (Boerner-Horvath) Clarifies Presumptive Eligibility for Pregnant Individuals (currently called PE4PW) coverage policies and ensures PE4PW patients can access abortion services regardless of other health coverage.
— AB 1646 (Nguyen) Expands access to abortion and gender-affirming care by allowing out-of-state medical school graduates to practice in California for up 90 days.
— AB 1707 (Pacheco) Provider Protections.
— SB 36 (Skinner) Strengthens safe haven protections by making it illegal for bail agents or bounty hunters to apprehend people in California and protect access to public benefits.
— SB 345 (Skinner) Provides legal protections for medication abortions and gender-affirming care.
— SB 385 (Atkins) Seeks to extend many of the updated training rules from SB 1375 last year to additional providers (i.e. physician assistants, etc.)— SB 487 (Atkins) Provides additional safeguards for California abortion providers and other entities and individuals that serve and support abortion patients that reside in states with hostile abortion laws.
