Pennsylvania Coalition for Informed Consent > Blog > Blog > Today’s Hearing Strengthened Our Resolve: Parents Are Essential to a Child’s Care

Oct 15, 2026

Today’s Hearing Strengthened Our Resolve: Parents Are Essential to a Child’s Care

PENNSYLVANIA PARENTS NEED TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENED TODAY

Today, the Independent Regulatory Review Commission approved Pennsylvania’s mental-health regulation by a vote of 4–1.

The hearing exposed a disturbing reality that many parents do not understand:

A parent may not be entitled to know what mental-health treatment their 14-year-old child is receiving.

During the discussion, even the language became revealing. A commissioner began to say “child,” then stopped and asked whether he should say “minor.”

“Minor” may be the legal term, but we must not forget who is affected: a 14-year-old child who may be frightened, distressed and expected to understand treatment, confidentiality, record releases and consequences that many adults would struggle to evaluate.

Officials explained that when a minor independently consents to outpatient mental-health treatment, the parent may receive a bill or insurance notice without being given meaningful information about the treatment for which the family is paying.

Jill Stemple summarized the records issue plainly:

“Whoever consented, they control access.”

That means a parent could potentially know that a service occurred while remaining unaware of:

  • Who is treating the child
  • What the child is being told
  • What diagnosis has been entered
  • What treatment plan has been created
  • What information is being documented
  • Who may receive that information
  • Whether a referral or medication has been recommended

When commissioners questioned what recourse a parent would have, the discussion turned away from the regulation and back to the statute. Chairman George Bedwick indicated that changing this result would require challenging or changing the underlying law.

Agency counsel further indicated that a parent seeking access to information could be forced to pursue the matter in county court.

Think about what that means.

A family may have to hire an attorney and go to court merely to seek information about mental-health treatment being provided to its own child.

The hearing also exposed confusion about the rights of parents when a child is younger than 14 and about how Pennsylvania’s requirements interact with federal privacy law. Officials indicated that additional technical guidance may be provided.

But guidance issued later is not the same as clear protection written into the regulation before it is approved.

Pennsylvania law provides notice and a prompt hearing process when a minor independently enters voluntary inpatient treatment. Parents or guardians must be promptly notified, and if an objection is filed, a hearing must be held within 72 hours.

No comparable safeguard ensures that parents will even know when a child age 14 or older begins outpatient mental-health treatment. When the child independently consents, the child generally controls access to the resulting treatment records.

How can parents monitor adverse reactions, coordinate care, correct inaccurate information or help a struggling child if they do not even know that treatment is occurring?

A right that depends upon accidentally discovering a concealed treatment relationship—and then going to court to obtain information—is not an enforceable parental right.

WHAT CAN FAMILIES DO?

Today’s vote should not be the end of public involvement. The regulation operates within a statute enacted by the General Assembly. If the law produces an unjust or dangerous result, legislators have the authority and responsibility to change it.

Several pending bills address parental involvement, minor consent and access to health information:

  • HB 120 would require parental or guardian consent before most minors receive a vaccine.
  • HB 252 would require specific written parental permission before a school gives a student access to a mental-health digital platform. It also provides notice, withdrawal rights and certain protections involving information collected from students.
  • HB 686 would expand parental access to a minor child’s medical and mental-health records. PCIC supports its objective while recommending a narrow exception when a court determines that disclosure would place a child in danger.
  • HB 83 would raise the age for independent mental-health consent from 14 to 16. Its broader liability language and provisions concerning minors with special needs should be amended before final passage.
  • HB 110 would substantially expand parental involvement and access to records. Because it also affects married, pregnant, graduated and otherwise legally independent minors, its full language requires careful review and amendment.
  • HB 581 contains valuable protections requiring notice of school health services, allowing parents to decline services and prohibiting schools from encouraging children to conceal health information from their parents. Those health-care protections deserve consideration on their own merits.

Families should also oppose HB 339 as presently written. It would require daily mental-health check-ins for public-school students from kindergarten through 12th grade without expressly providing affirmative parental consent, an individual parental opt-out, clear limits on questioning or sufficient protections governing confidentiality, records and the use of a child’s responses.

Parents should ask their schools:

  • Who is permitted to speak with my child about mental health?
  • Is the interaction informal support, screening, assessment or treatment?
  • What qualifications and licenses does that person possess?
  • Is parental permission required?
  • What information is collected?
  • Does the interaction create a medical, counseling or educational record?
  • Who may access or receive that information?
  • Can an outside provider or digital platform receive it?
  • Could it lead to a diagnosis, referral, treatment plan or medication?
  • When will I be notified?
  • Can I review and correct the records?
  • What happens if I object?

Parents can also:

  • Request every school policy covering mental-health counseling, screenings, wellness check-ins, surveys, referrals and digital platforms.
  • Request copies of consent forms, privacy policies, data-sharing agreements and record-retention policies.
  • Ask school boards to require affirmative parental consent before nonemergency mental-health screening, counseling or digital services.
  • Submit written questions to administrators and request written answers.
  • Speak during public comment at school-board meetings.
  • Follow legislation involving minor consent and parental access.
  • Ask candidates and elected officials whether they support timely parental notice, informed consent, record access and due process before a parent is excluded.

Children experiencing abuse must have a safe way to seek help, and genuine emergencies must be addressed immediately. But those narrow circumstances must not become a routine pathway for schools, providers, digital platforms or government agencies to exclude families.

Pennsylvania needs a coherent standard: parents receive timely notice and remain part of their minor child’s health-care decisions unless a court, after reviewing the individual circumstances and providing due process, determines that parental involvement would place the child in danger.

The regulation passed, but the larger issue now returns to the General Assembly—and to Pennsylvania families.

Know who is speaking with your child. Know what information is being collected. Know what is being entered into a record. Follow these bills. Ask questions. Attend school-board meetings. Contact lawmakers.

Insist that Pennsylvania recognize parents as an essential part of a child’s care—not an obstacle to be removed from it.

Read the Sources We encourage every Pennsylvania family to read the regulation, the governing statutes and the pending legislation for themselves. The links below include the official IRRC docket, Pennsylvania law, Department of Human Services guidance and bills currently before the General Assembly.

Regulation and hearing

Existing law and regulations

Bills families should follow

Strongest alignment with PCIC’s mission

Support the objective, but seek revisions

Oppose or substantially amend

  • HB 339—Daily Mental-Health Check-ins in Schools
    Would require daily mental-health check-ins for public-school students in kindergarten through 12th grade without express parental-consent, opt-out and data-protection provisions in the introduced text.

Complete legislative tracker

Because that tracker contains many bills unrelated to this specific post, I would use it as a final “Track additional legislation” link rather than as the primary source for individual bills.