Latest news with #AmyGaley
Yahoo
07-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Parents who refuse gender-affirming care for kids would be protected under NC bill
Prospective adoptive or foster parents in North Carolina could not be denied the placement of a child in their care because the parents oppose providing the child with gender-affirming and transition care, under two nearly identical bills moving through the state legislature. The bill would also mean that a biological, adoptive or foster parent's refusal to allow their child to receive such care — put another way, as it is stated in the bill, 'raising a child consistent with the child's biological sex' — would not qualify as abuse or neglect under law. House Bill 560 and Senate Bill 442, both titled the 'Parents Protection Act,' received approval in multiple committees Tuesday. The Senate plans to take its bill up on the floor Wednesday. Thursday is the General Assembly's 'crossover' date for this year's legislative session, or the day by which a bill must be approved by one chamber to remain in consideration for the rest of the session. Both bills are sponsored by Republicans, who control both chambers of the legislature. Sen. Amy Galey, a Burlington Republican and cosponsor of the Senate's bill, said in a committee Tuesday afternoon that the bill would protect parents' ability to 'care for children without the threat of losing supervision over that child because they refuse to affirm the gender identity of a child who is experiencing gender dysphoria.' The bill also 'shields parents who refuse to affirm gender transitioning from prosecution,' Galey told the committee. Parents could still be 'otherwise' prosecuted for child abuse or neglect, but their refusal to provide their child with gender-affirming care could not the be 'sole premise' of such a case against the parent, Galey said. Several Democrats questioned the need for the bill in committees Tuesday. 'Is this a problem in North Carolina, or are we solving a problem that doesn't actually exist here?' asked Sen. Julie Mayfield, an Asheville Democrat, in the Senate's rules committee. Galey, responding to Mayfield, said 'the situation has occurred in quite a few states now,' but that she was not aware of any instances in North Carolina. Earlier Tuesday, in another committee meeting, Galey cited legislation in California that would have allowed courts to consider, as one of many factors, whether a parent affirms their child's identity in making determinations about parental custody and visitation rights. Critics of that 2023 measure, which Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom ultimately vetoed, argued that it could have resulted in a child being taken from their parents — but legal experts and the bill's sponsor disputed that assertion, The Associated Press reported. Rep. Donnie Loftis, a Gastonia Republican who is a cosponsor of the House's bill, said in another committee Tuesday that the bill is a 'preemptive motion, for right now.' DHHS, Democrats oppose bill Under state law, children in foster care are guaranteed a 'bill of rights' for the quality and standards of the homes they are placed in. Among other requirements, the bill of rights states that children are entitled to 'a safe foster home free of violence, abuse, neglect, and danger.' Under the proposed Parents Protection Act, 'raising a child in a manner consistent with the child's biological sex, including any related mental health or medical decisions' would not be considered a violation of the bill of rights. Galey defended the bill by arguing that some parents might oppose gender-affirming care because of their religious beliefs, which could instruct them to believe that 'gender is a gift which is given from the Lord.' Those beliefs alone, Galey argued, should not prevent the parents from having a child placed in their care. If 'the person holding those beliefs wants to become a foster parent, I would ... assert that they should not be disqualified from that because they hold those beliefs.' But Janssen White, assistant secretary for government affairs at the state Department of Health and Human Services, noted that there are more parties involved in foster care than the foster parents themselves — including the child and the child's biological parents. White, who told senators that DHHS has concerns about the portions of the bill related to foster care, said biological parents retain 'the right to make decisions about how their children are raised.' DHHS officials are worried that the bill would undermine that right, White said. 'While foster parents serve a critical role in the child welfare system, the rights of all individuals and biological parents must must be maintained,' White said. DHHS is also concerned that the bill would undermine the ability of county-level social services agencies and courts 'to consider all necessary information when determining an appropriate placement that prioritizes the child's best interest, which is critical,' White said. Bill doesn't go 'both directions' Galey seemed to address that concern earlier in the Senate committee, when Mayfield asked her whether the bill would prevent the agencies that oversee foster care from placing a child with parents who are supportive of gender-affirming care, over a family who would not support such treatment. 'I think that we would all agree,' Galey replied, 'that in searching for appropriate care for a foster child, [departments of social services] should consider all relevant things which don't discriminate against people based on their religion or make them give up their personal speech.' Earlier Tuesday, Sen. Lisa Grafstein, a Raleigh Democrat, expressed concerns that the bill 'is not going both directions' — that is, it does not provide protections to parents who do support their child's gender transition, and who may be subject to criticism or claims of abuse from people outside of their family. Grafstein then noted that Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, in 2022 directed the state's Department of Family and Protective Services to investigate families who provided gender-affirming care to children, a move that has since been subject to court injunctions. Grafstein also questioned whether courts or social services agencies would be able to consider the 'supportiveness of the home' when those entities are deciding where to place a child, to which Galey responded by saying that 'the best interest of the child is the North Star.' 'This is why I think it should go both ways,' Grafstein said, adding that if the bill would prevent the consideration of a parent's opposition to gender-affirming care in placement decisions, 'then it should not be a factor that that family will provide gender-affirmative care.' 'If we're trying to address the concern that gender identity issues will come into play in the assessments, then I think there's a way for us to address that, you know, in a way that's neutral as to how the courts should view the family involved,' Grafstein said. The House's Wednesday calendar had not been announced late Tuesday, but it is likely the chamber will take up its version of the bill later in the week.
Yahoo
01-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Competing bills loosening the NC school calendar law differ, move through the legislature
Students work in class at Bugg Magnet Elementary School in Raleigh on Aug. 28, 2024. (Photo: Galen Bacharier / NC Newsline) School boards would have a bit more leeway in deciding when to start and end the school year under a bill the Senate passed Wednesday. Senate bill 754 would let schools start up to a week earlier than currently allowed. It passed the Senate with on a 39-7 vote. Since 2004, a law backed by the tourism industry required schools to start no earlier than the Monday closest to Aug. 26 and end no later than the Friday closest to June 11. Over the years, House members approved bill after bill to lift those restrictions. The Senate resisted any changes and the House bills died there. Local school boards have been defying the law. One quarter of the state's 115 school districts voted last year to defy it, according to WFAE. Sen. Amy Galey (R-Alamance) told senators the bill was a product of weeks of discussions with the NC School Boards Association and the state's travel and tourism industry. The industry has a strong financial interest in school calendars, she said. The change senators endorsed Wednesday would allow traditional calendar schools to open no earlier than the Monday closest to Aug. 19 and close the academic year no later than the Friday in May before Memorial Day. In the House, the chamber's K-12 Education Committee on Tuesday approved repealing the calendar law with a bill allowing local school boards to decide on their own when the school year starts and ends. The House Rules Committee was set to vote on the bill Wednesday evening, likely its last stop before it reaches the House floor. The Senate bill establishes the State Board of Education as a gatekeeper. It will decide whether districts deserve to open a week early. The bill includes penalties for school districts that defy the law. The board would be required to withhold financial support for districts' central office administration until the districts comply. Individuals and businesses within school districts would be able to sue those that don't comply with the law. Courts would be able to award claimants up to $10,000 and attorney's fees. It has been lawsuits in some districts that forced local boards to open schools later than they wanted. The Union County school board backed away from its plan to start school early in 2023 when two parents sued, WFAE reported. The Carteret County school board dropped its plan to appeal a court decision last year that its school calendar was illegal. Businesses sued the Carteret board over a decision to start school in mid-August, the News & Observer reported.
Yahoo
09-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
NC Senate committee okays bill to alter K-12 school calendar
Sen. Amy Galey (R-Alamance) explains her proposal to alter the public school calendar to the Senate education Committee on Wednesday, April 9, 2025 (Photo: Screengrab from NCGA video feed) The North Carolina Senate Education Committee voted on Wednesday to approve a bill that seeks to settle an issue that has plagued and divided state and local policymakers for more than two decades. Senate Bill 754, which is entitled 'School Calendar Flexibility: A New Alternative' would offer school districts two options for commencing the new school year. One follows the current law, which requires a start date no earlier than the Monday closest to Aug. 26 and an end date no later than the Friday closest to June. The second and new option would allow schools to start on the Monday closest to Aug. 19, with the school year ending no later than the Friday before Memorial Day. The bill is sponsored by Senate President Pro Tem Phil Berger (R-Rockingham), and Sens. Amy Galey (R-Alamance), and Michael Lee (R-New Hanover). On Wednesday, Galey told members of the Senate Education/Higher Education Committee that the bill represents a compromise between the forces that helped enact the current law in 2004 (the state travel and tourism industry and a group of parents concerned about preserving summer vacations) and local education officials who would prefer even greater flexibility in setting the public school calendar. She said that as many as a quarter of the state's 116 districts are out of compliance with the current law. Though the bill was approved on an almost unanimous voice vote and forwarded to the Judiciary Committee (among other things, the measure includes language that would allow businesses to sue local boards that set school calendars in violation of its specified dates), two Democratic senators voiced concern that the bill does not go far enough in addressing the needs and expertise of local school districts. Both Sens. Gladys Robinson (D-Guilford) and Sophia Chitlik (D-Durham) argued that there are many situations in which local school districts would be better able to meet the needs of children in their communities by starting the school year earlier in August – a freedom, Robinson noted, that's already given to charter schools. Galey, with support from Sen. Bobby Hanig – a Republican who represents several coastal counties – responded that there are many families and businesses who are severely burdened by earlier start dates and that the bill was an attempt to find a middle ground. In addition to the potential legal liability included in the bill for counties that fail to abide by the new start date, the measure also includes language – sought most aggressively by mountain counties that must cope with more snow days in the winter – that would permit the school year closing date to be extended in situations where districts experience closures due to extreme weather. The bill would take effect in the 2026-'27 school year.
Yahoo
31-03-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
NC lawmakers consider bills to lower healthcare costs
RALEIGH, N.C. () – Lawmakers in both chambers and on both sides of the aisle are pushing through measures to reform North Carolina's healthcare system. Senate Bill 316 aims to lower healthcare costs and increase transparency in billing. Key features of the measure include requiring hospitals to file reports quarterly, instead of annually, to the Department of Health and Human Services on cost data, outlawing facility fees and giving the State Auditor authority to examine billing transparency. State Senator Amy Galey (R-Alamance) said it's a step in curtailing 'unacceptably high healthcare costs.' 'Part Three is greater fairness in billing and collections practices; it requires an itemized list to any patient before referring an unpaid bill to a collection agency,' Galey said in a committee hearing last week. Here's why the the FAA wants you to lose the laser SB 316 also looks to establish a timeline for insurers to conduct prior authorizations, similar to House Bill 434. place North Carolina among the Top 10 Worst States for Health Care in 2025. Researchers said they factored in quality, cost and accessibility through 44 metrics. 'Basically, patients are not really getting the most bang for their buck,' said WalletHub writer Chip Lupo. 'We're talking about quality: quality of public hospital systems, number of hospital beds per capita, number of physicians, nurse practitioners, physicians, even dentists. Even so far down is available at urgent care centers, convenient care clinics, rural health clinics. Now that's a key point here in North Carolina.' Lupo said he recognized a 'regional pattern' tied to socioeconomic factors as several Southern states ranked near the bottom of the list. 'You go east of I-95 where I'm from. Still a lot a lot of farming, a lot of low income. So while and you would think that with Duke University and North Carolina, all these great medical centers, the health care outcome would be a little bit more favorable, North Carolina. But it's simply not the case.' According to Lupo, despite high costs and low access in some areas, patient outcomes in North Carolina are trending in a positive direction. Forbes for healthcare, citing the highest average premium for residents with 'plus-one' health insurance. The study found that Hawaii had the most affordable options. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
20-03-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
NC bill seeks more public reporting of hospital charges and price guarantees for patients
A Senate bill would provide patients with more up-front information about hospital charges and would fine hospital CEOs whose facilities do not report their prices. The Senate Health Committee on Wednesday approved Senate bill 316, called Lower Healthcare Costs. 'This bill is an attempt to shine a light on every part of the health care system to begin to see where the cost drivers truly exist and to start to tamp down on those costs,' said Sen. Amy Galey (R-Alamance), who is one of the bill's sponsors. The bill focuses on hospitals and other health facilities. Under the bill, hospitals would be largely prohibited from charging what are known as facility fees. Those are charges that may be added to bills when patients go to a hospital-owned clinics. Health care facilities would have to send patients itemized lists of charges before sending unpaid bills to collections. Hospitals and ambulatory care facilities would be required to provide quarterly reports on the costs of common procedures. CEOs would face fines of up to $2,000 a day for failure to comply. In cases where patients are not experiencing health emergencies, health care facilities would have to provide them with 'good faith estimates' for each procedure. The final bills could not exceed the estimates by more than 5%. A spokeswoman for the North Carolina Healthcare Association, which represents hospitals, said in an email that the organization is evaluating the bill and its potential impacts, and would communicate directly with senators. Sen. Jim Burgin (R-Harnett), said greater price transparency will result in lower costs. People who don't need emergency medical care will have time to compare prices, he said. 'You ought to know what it's going to cost,' said Burgin, one of the bill sponsors. 'You ought to know if you're going to get a separate bill from the anesthesiologist, or the radiologist, or the lab, or anybody else.'
