A Michigan mother is outraged at a new state law posted at her medical provider’s office that forced her to stand aside and let the nurse speak privately with her minor-aged child about STDs and birth control.
The recently posted sign at the doctor’s office: “Attention parents of adolescent children age 12y-17y. New Michigan Medical Records access laws have been put in place. This will require a nurse to have a short 5 minute private conversation with your child. We will explain the purpose and process at the time of the visit and answer any questions you may have,” The Blaze reported.
Christy Duffy said in a scathing blog post that she was shocked at the notification, which she only learned when she brought in her 17-year-old daughter for treatment of a minor ailment.
In her blog, Ms. Duffy wrote: “I asked if this policy was in effect and if so, how could I opt out. The receptionist told me it’s a new law and there is no opting out. Working to keep my cool, I said, ’I’m sure there is.’ She said, ’No, there isn’t.’ At which point I asked if I needed to leave and go to the urgent care center because I was not submitting my daughter to such a conversation. That did not go over well.”
Ms. Duffy then wrote how the office manager requested a private chat with her and explained how the new law would let children access their medical records on line and actually block their parents from viewing those documents.
Ms. Duffy also explained in her post what the children would be learning during their private chat with the nurse, The Blaze reported: “The nurse would also inform my children that the doctor’s office is a safe place for them to receive information about STDs, HIV and birth control. That is what the nurse would chatting about with my children without any pesky parental oversight.”
Ms. Duffy said she demanded an opt-out provision and said in her blog post: “What they want to do is talk to your child about sex and drugs … without your input. Is it really such a stretch to imagine that a doctor who does not value abstinence before marriage would encourage your daughters — as young as 12! — to receive birth control? Is it really such a stretch to imagine a nurse telling a young boy — because a 12-year-old boy is a BOY — that she will give him condoms so he can be ’safe?’ “
• Cheryl K. Chumley can be reached at cchumley@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.