ACLU OF FLORIDA STATEMENT ON BILL THAT ALLOWS HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS AND PAYORS TO REFUSE HEALTHCARE TO FLORIDIANS
* * *
The
This bill is overly broad and includes any healthcare provider or facility licensed under a dozen different statutes, including doctors, nurses, pharmacies, hospitals, mental health providers, medical transport services, clinical lab personnel, nursing homes, and more.
Additionally, the bill allows providers to refuse to provide any type of "healthcare service," broadly defined as including, but not limited to, medical research, medical procedures, testing, diagnosis, referral, dispensing medications, therapy, recordkeeping, and "any other care or service."
The bill broadly defines healthcare payors to include any employer, as well as any health insurer, health plan, HMO, or "any other entity that pays for, or arranges for payment of, any health care service."
* * *
"This bill is shocking in its breadth, vagueness, and government overreach into the private sector and regulated businesses. It goes far beyond any alleged claims of religious freedom, as it applies not just to religious objections but also to 'moral' and 'ethical' beliefs. Does the legislature really want to force private businesses to retain employees who refuse to do their job on the basis of a subjectively held alleged 'ethical' or 'moral' belief?
"What does this even mean? There is no definition of 'moral' or 'ethical' in the bill. Who determines what constitutes a sincerely held moral or ethical belief, and more importantly, why should access to health care be denied based on such vague, imprecise, and subjective terms? We have grave concerns that this bill will lead to discriminatory healthcare practices and that LGBTQ+ individuals, people of color, and those most marginalized in our communities will be disproportionately harmed.
"What if someone's ethical or moral belief is that women should not have babies unless they are married? Or that poor people shouldn't have more than one child? Or if they believe it's unethical to bring a child into the world given overpopulation and climate change? Can they refuse to provide prenatal health care to that pregnant person? Can they refuse to assist in labor and delivery? Can their employer refuse to provide health insurance to cover pregnancy and labor and delivery? Can a nurse refuse to return calls to the patients or schedule follow-up appointments? Or what if a pharmacist is morally opposed to preventing pregnancy, can they refuse to sell the morning-after pill or refill a prescription for birth control? These and many similar issues beg the question of whether we really want to provide a state-sanctioned license to discriminate based on someone's subjective moral and ethical beliefs.
"This legislature needs to think long and hard about the potential consequences of such a wide-ranging bill. This bill is so overly broad that it includes not just doctors, but any health care provider or facility licensed under a dozen different statutes, including doctors, nurses, pharmacies, hospitals, mental health providers, medical transport services, clinical lab personnel, and more. It applies to both public and private schools, colleges and universities. It applies to health insurers, employers, HMOs, and any other entity or employer that pays for or arranges payment of health care services. It applies to any type of 'healthcare service,' broadly defined as including, but not limited to, medical research, medical procedures, testing, diagnosis, referral, dispensing medications, therapy, recordkeeping, and 'any other care or service.'
"Freedom of religion is one of our most fundamental rights as Americans. That freedom does not give any of us the right to harm others, and this bill goes far beyond religious objections and allows people to refuse to provide healthcare services based on alleged 'ethical' or 'moral' beliefs.
"Medical standards, not individual, subjective beliefs, should guide medical and health care services."
* * *
Original text here: https://www.aclufl.org/en/press-releases/aclu-florida-statement-bill-allows-healthcare-providers-and-payors-refuse-healthcare



Colo. House Democrats: House Advances Property Insurance of Last Resort, Pathways for Thermal Energy Technology
Illinois Senate Democrats: Reconstructive Surgeries for Trauma Survivors Would Be Covered Under Loughran Cappel Measure That Heads to Senate Floor
Advisor News
- House panel votes to raise certain taxes, transfer money to offset Medicaid shortfall
- Iowa House backs temporary tax hike to fill Medicaid gap
- Iowa Medicaid temporary tax plan draws sharp public opposition
- Charitable giving planning can strengthen advisor/client relationships
- New $6K deduction could provide tax planning window for retirees
More Advisor NewsAnnuity News
- We can help find a loved one’s life insurance policy
- 2025: A record-breaking year for annuity sales via banks and BDs
- Lincoln Financial launches two new FIAs
- Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance Company trademark request filed
- The forces shaping life and annuities in 2026
More Annuity NewsHealth/Employee Benefits News
- Massachusetts probed over abortion coverage mandate
- CT leaders debate how to fix health care: Blunt federal cuts, up reimbursement or kill private health care?
- When health insurance costs $2,500 per month, families make tough choices
- In U.S. Health Insurance Market, Consolidation Of Insurers Is Increasing Premiums
- Health insurance jargon can be frustrating and confusing – here's how to navigate it
More Health/Employee Benefits NewsLife Insurance News
- Murray Giles Hulse
- New individual life premium hits record-setting $17.5B in 2025
- Maryland orders Cigna to halt underpaying doctors or give cause
- Insurers optimistic about their investments in 2026
- AM Best Affirms Credit Ratings of PVI Insurance Corporation
More Life Insurance News