Medical records; access to medical records, copies, waiver of privilege, and exception for inmates when threat to safety or security of self or institution; fee requirement; discretionary; effective date.
HB2964 amends Oklahoma’s medical-records access statute to adjust and clarify the fees that doctors, hospitals, medical institutions, and their business associates may charge for copying and producing records. It preserves a patient’s right to obtain access to medical records, x-rays, images, pathology slides, and medical bills, and it continues to allow disclosure of a deceased patient’s records only with a court order or authorized release from a representative or family member. The bill also keeps existing carve-outs for psychological, psychiatric, mental health, and substance-abuse treatment records, which remain governed by separate law.
The measure modifies the fee structure by making several charges discretionary rather than mandatory and by setting or reaffirming maximum amounts for page copies, attorney/insurer/subpoena requests, certifications or affidavits, digital production, printed images, and electronic media. It also specifies that providers may not charge patients for searching, retrieving, reviewing, and preparing their own records, and it limits postage charges for faxed copies. The bill further preserves special rules for disability-determination requests and inmate records where disclosure could threaten safety or security, and it sets an effective date of November 1, 2026.
HB2964 would amend 76 O.S. 2021, Section 19, the state law governing access to medical records and related fees. Its practical effect is to update the pricing and delivery rules for record production, including electronic records and media, while maintaining existing patient-access rights and exceptions for mental health-related records, disability-determination requests, and certain inmate records. The bill affects patients, health care providers, hospitals, medical institutions, business associates handling records, attorneys, insurers, and subpoena requesters.
The available voting history shows strong support and no recorded opposition in committee or on the House floor. The bill passed the Public Health Committee 5-0, the Health and Human Services Oversight Committee 11-0, and third reading in the House 89-0. The limited transcript excerpts do not show substantive debate or criticism, suggesting the measure was generally noncontroversial among members who voted on it.
No major points of contention are evident in the provided record. The main policy issue implied by the text is the balance between lowering or standardizing record-copying costs and allowing providers to recover expenses for producing records, especially for attorneys, insurers, and subpoena requests. Another possible area of sensitivity is the continued exclusion of mental health, psychiatric, psychological, and substance-abuse records from the general access rules, but the bill leaves those protections intact rather than changing them.