Illinois lawmaker warns medical records bill could delay care
[May 04, 2026]
By Catrina Barker | The Center Square contributor
(The Center Square) – State lawmakers are clashing over an Illinois
proposal that would restrict how certain sensitive medical information
is shared, with supporters arguing it protects patient privacy and
critics warning it could jeopardize care.
House Bill 5295, also known as the Reproductive Health Records Privacy
Act, would require health providers to segregate records related to
abortion and gender-affirming care and limit their disclosure –
particularly to out-of-state entities.
During floor debate, bill sponsor state Rep. Mary Beth Canty,
D-Arlington Heights, said the measure is designed to shield patients
from legal risks in other states.
“Not all medical treatment is treated the same across states,” Canty
said. “Some states criminalize certain types of medical treatment… and
here in Illinois, we believe that people should be safe to receive the
care that they choose to receive.”
Canty said records would be automatically segregated, with patients able
to release them if they choose, adding the restricted information is
“not medically necessary” and that abortion-related complications could
be treated as a miscarriage.
But opponent, state Rep. Bill Hauter, R-Morton, a physician, argued the
proposal could lead to incomplete medical records and potential safety
risks.
“We rely, as medical professionals, on the medical record to be complete
and accurate and private,” Hauter told The Center Square. “To say that
this information is unimportant… ignores real-world scenarios where it
could be critical to patient care.”
On the House floor, Hauter pressed Canty on whether withholding
information could delay diagnosis or treatment, particularly in
emergency situations.
“How about an emergency department for an unconscious patient?” Hauter
asked. “Wouldn’t it be vital to see the complete medical record of the
patient?”
[to top of second column]
|
Canty responded that such patients would be treated regardless and
reiterated that the restricted information would not be necessary
for care.
Hauter disagreed, pointing to scenarios involving complications from
abortion medication or undisclosed medical history.
“We already have privacy laws that protect every part of a patient’s
record. You can keep it private without removing it from the medical
record,” said Hauter. “It’s very difficult – if not impossible – to
fully segregate this information in an electronic medical record,
including medications, prior history and physician notes.”
As the bill advances, Hauter also questioned the motivations behind
the proposal, pointing to political considerations at the executive
level.
“He wants something he can show – ‘I did this’ – to advance his
agenda. It doesn’t matter if it’s constitutional or workable or even
implemented. He wants to sign it and campaign on it.”
Hauter also raised concerns about how the proposal could affect
communication between medical professionals, including whether
doctors could face limits on verbally sharing relevant patient
information during treatment.
“Are you going to limit the free speech of healthcare
professionals,” said Hauter. “If a patient tells me something in the
course of care and I communicate that to another provider because
it’s medically necessary, am I no longer allowed to mention it?”
The measure has passed the Illinois House and is now in the Senate
for consideration.
 |
