Get the Facts on S.811 in South Carolina
Get the Facts on S.811
Learn More About This Anti-LGBTQ Bill in South Carolina
What Is S.811
South Carolina Senate bill 811 would grant medical providers a broad “license to discriminate” based on their personal or religious beliefs, which could negatively impact LGBTQ people, women, people of color, and people of diverse faith backgrounds. This religious refusal bill would allow those involved in medical care – so broadly defined so as to include doctors, nurses, receptionists and other employees – to refuse to admit or offer services to patients in need of care in any non-emergency situation.
The specific services listed in the bill that a medical care provider can refuse include an “initial examination,” which suggests that a medical professional could refuse services based solely on who a person is, not just the care they need. Additionally, this bill would also allow a “medical practitioner, health care institution, or health care payer” to discriminate against the LGBTQ+ community in their employment practices, as well as allowing insurance companies the ability to refuse to pay for care.
In short, this bill would allow for discrimination at every turn in the medical field, from who is hired, what services are available to which people, and what insurance will decide to cover.
Click to read the full “Get the Facts” fact sheet.
Reasons to Oppose S.811
SB811 would allow any medical provider the ability to deny non-emergency services to patients. This would apply to receptionists, nurses, doctors, pharmacists, counselors, insurance companies, and others in healthcare.
No one should face discrimination because of who they are or who they love – and everyone should be able to access quality, affirming healthcare in their hometown.
The denial of non-emergency care could take countless forms, all of which are harmful to the community. It could be a receptionist refusing to check-in a patient receiving gender affirming care at the doctor’s office. It could also mean interference with access to prescriptions like birth control, fertility treatments, or PrEP if the pharmacists or nurses involved object. Staff at a nursing home could refuse to offer trans and nonbinary patients their hormone therapy.
Hospitals and other medical offices or institutions would be able to fire or refuse to hire individuals based on their gender identity or sexual orientation.
Under this bill, insurance companies could decline coverage or refuse to reimburse clients for care. A transgender patient could have a doctor overseeing their transition related care, but be unable to afford their services due to insurance. This cost would create yet another barrier to access proper medical care.
This bill would be especially dangerous in rural areas where access to healthcare is already limited. If a person is denied treatment by the only medical provider in their area, what options do they have?
S.811 and “Conversion Therapy”
How S.811 Would Sanction ‘Conversion Therapy’
Many South Carolinians see S.811 as a broad attempt to sanction the anti-LGBTQ practice of ‘conversion therapy,’ or the process of trying to change someone’s sexual orientation or gender identity.
The bill’s sponsor in the Senate filed the bill after the city of Columbia made moves to protect minors from the dangerous anti-LGBTQ practice. While a House version of the bill had already been filed, the bill sponsor said that Columbia’s movement on ‘conversion therapy’ sped up his timeline
Columbia succeeded in passing a strong ordinance prohibiting ‘conversion therapy’ on June 15, 2021, the first city in SC to enact protections for LGBTQ minors from ‘conversion therapy, joining 20 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and dozens of cities.
S.811 is seen as an attempt to effectively preempt municipalities from being able to protect minors from this anti-LGBTQ practice.
The Dangers of Anti-LGBTQ ‘Conversion Therapy’
“Conversion therapy,” also referred to as “reparative therapy,” includes a broad range of techniques involving rejection, shame, and psychological abuse. Tactics can include extreme electroshock treatments, institutionalization, and “counseling” services based on pseudoscience.
These discredited practices are based on the false claim that being LGBTQ is a mental illness that needs to be cured – a view with no scientific basis.
The practice is not only ineffective, but it is also dangerous, inflicting emotional and psychological trauma on children that can follow them for the rest of their lives.
Conversion therapy has been rejected by every leading professional medical and mental health association in the nation.
Data about LGBTQ South Carolinians and Healthcare
Research shows that LGBTQ people are at an increased risk of negative mental health outcomes due to factors including their exposure to stigma and discrimination. In the South, these minority stressors may be more pronounced. More than one half of South Carolina respondents to the 2019 Southern LGBTQ Health Survey reported fair or poor mental health (51.3%). Among transgender respondents in South Carolina, 65.9% of trans respondents in South Carolina described their mental health as fair or poor.
More than half – 51.5% – of respondents in South Carolina said they feel that being in the South always or often makes it harder to access quality medical care for LGBTQ individuals. Among transgender respondents in South Carolina, 72.7% said that being in the South always or often makes it harder for LGBTQ people to access medical care.
Comfort also comes down to being able to trust providers to understand LGBTQ identities and the community’s unique healthcare needs. However, 23.3% of all South Carolina respondents (including 17.2% of cisgender people and 43.8% of transgender people) said they always or often need to educate providers about their health care needs, while 29.8% of all SC respondents (including 23.6% of cisgender people and 51.0% of transgender people) said they always or often need to educate providers about their LGBTQ identity
S.811 would likely exacerbate these feelings of discomfort and poor mental health. We need to be expanding and increasing South Carolinians’ access to quality healthcare – not limiting it by granting providers a broad “license to discriminate.”
