Senate Bill 759, the Minors Health Protection Act, revises North Carolina law on when minors may consent to medical care and when parents may access a minor’s medical records. The bill narrows and clarifies the categories of care a minor may consent to on their own, while also adding a new requirement that a parent or legal guardian must give written consent before a health care provider administers any vaccine that has received emergency use authorization but is not yet fully approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to a person under 18.
The bill also creates a limited exception allowing a health care practitioner or physician to examine a minor without parental consent when the provider reasonably believes the exam may reveal information that must be reported as child abuse or neglect. In addition, it establishes a general rule that parents may review all of their minor child’s medical records, including records for care the minor could otherwise consent to, but it carves out exceptions for records related to the abuse/neglect examination, records barred by court order, and records tied to an investigation of a parent for a crime against the child when law enforcement requests nondisclosure.
Impact
The bill amends G.S. 90-21.4 and G.S. 90-21.5 and adds new G.S. 90-21.5A and G.S. 90-21.5B, changing the legal framework for minor consent, physician confidentiality, and parental access to records. It would require providers to obtain parental written consent for certain EUA vaccines for minors, expand parental access to medical records, and create a statutory exception for abuse- or neglect-related examinations without parental consent. The act applies prospectively to acts occurring on or after October 1, 2025.
Sentiment
Based on the bill’s title and text, the measure appears to be framed as a child-protection and parental-rights bill, with an emphasis on increasing parental involvement in minors’ medical decisions and records. No committee transcripts or votes were provided, so there is no recorded legislative debate or vote history to indicate broader support or opposition. The available context suggests the bill is likely to be viewed favorably by supporters of parental consent requirements and more cautiously by those concerned about adolescent access to confidential care.
Contention
The main points of contention are likely to be the parental consent requirement for emergency-use-authorized vaccines, the reduction of minors’ independent access to certain confidential medical services, and the broad parental right to access medical records. Opponents may argue that these provisions could deter minors from seeking care for pregnancy, substance use, emotional distress, or other sensitive issues, while supporters may argue that parents should be informed and involved in major medical decisions. The abuse/neglect examination exception and the law-enforcement/court-order carveouts may also raise questions about privacy, mandatory reporting, and when providers may act without parental permission.