S.1774 - Protecting Minors in Federal Health Plans Act (119th Congress)
Summary
S.1774, the "Protecting Minors in Federal Health Plans Act," seeks to amend Title 5 of the United States Code to restrict coverage for gender-affirming care for individuals under 18 within the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) program. The bill defines 'gender-affirming care or service' and outlines specific exceptions, including treatments for verifiable disorders of sexual development, infections or injuries caused by prior interventions, and procedures addressing imminent risks to life or major bodily function. It also addresses hormone therapy for precocious or delayed puberty when consistent with the individual's biological sex.
Expected Effects
The bill, if enacted, would prohibit FEHB plans from covering gender-affirming care for minors, potentially limiting access to such treatments for federal employees and their families. This could lead to individuals seeking care outside of their insurance coverage or delaying treatment, with possible impacts on their health and well-being. The legislation also includes provisions for individuals currently undergoing hormone therapy to continue treatment under a supervised reduction schedule for up to one year after the effective date.
Potential Benefits
- Could potentially reduce healthcare costs for the federal government and FEHB program by limiting coverage.
- May align with the views of some individuals and groups who oppose gender-affirming care for minors.
- Provides exceptions for certain medical conditions and treatments, such as disorders of sexual development and precocious puberty.
- Could prevent potential long-term health consequences associated with gender-affirming care, according to some perspectives.
- May reinforce parental rights and control over their children's medical decisions.
Most Benefited Areas:
Potential Disadvantages
- Restricts access to healthcare for transgender and gender-diverse youth, potentially leading to negative mental and physical health outcomes.
- May be discriminatory and violate the rights of transgender individuals to equal access to healthcare.
- Could create disparities in healthcare access based on geographic location and insurance coverage.
- May interfere with the doctor-patient relationship and medical decision-making.
- Could face legal challenges based on constitutional grounds, such as equal protection and due process.
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's constitutional alignment is questionable, particularly concerning equal protection under the law. While the Constitution does not explicitly address gender identity, the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause prohibits discrimination. This bill could be argued as discriminatory against transgender individuals.
Furthermore, the bill could potentially infringe upon the right to privacy and bodily autonomy, rights that, while not explicitly stated, are often inferred from the Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments. The government's intrusion into medical decisions, particularly those made in consultation with healthcare professionals, raises concerns about the scope of governmental power.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).