Health Facilities - Confidentiality of Medical Records - Crisis Pregnancy Clinics
HB 615 expands Maryland’s medical-record confidentiality law to explicitly include crisis pregnancy clinics within the definition of “health care provider” for purposes of Health-General § 4-301. Under current law, the subtitle governing confidentiality of medical records applies to licensed providers and a list of health care facilities; this bill adds crisis pregnancy clinics, including mobile facilities that provide pregnancy-related health care and are not covered entities under HIPAA, to that list.
By doing so, the bill would subject crisis pregnancy clinics to the same state confidentiality requirements that already apply to other health care providers and facilities. The practical effect is to extend statutory protections and obligations around the handling, disclosure, and safeguarding of patient medical records to these clinics, even when they are not otherwise covered by federal HIPAA rules.
The bill amends Health-General § 4-301 to broaden the statutory definition of “health care provider” and thereby bring crisis pregnancy clinics under Maryland’s medical-record confidentiality framework. This would affect clinics that offer pregnancy-related health care, including mobile clinics, by making them subject to state confidentiality rules for medical records and related privacy obligations. The bill does not create a new confidentiality regime; it extends an existing one to an additional category of facilities, with an effective date of October 1, 2026.
Based on the available context, the bill appears to be in an early stage and had only a House hearing scheduled, with no recorded votes or committee transcript excerpts provided. As a result, there is no documented floor or committee sentiment in the materials supplied. The bill’s subject matter suggests a privacy-focused approach, but the record here does not show formal support or opposition from legislators or witnesses.
The main point of potential contention is the inclusion of crisis pregnancy clinics, especially mobile clinics that are not HIPAA-covered entities, in the state’s medical-record confidentiality law. Supporters would likely view the bill as a privacy and patient-protection measure that ensures consistent confidentiality standards for pregnancy-related care. Opponents, if any, may focus on the policy implications of regulating crisis pregnancy clinics differently or on whether the bill is intended to address broader concerns about those clinics’ practices. No specific objections or supporters are identified in the provided materials.