The Indiana Senate passed a bill Monday that aims to keep government entities like the Indiana Department of Child Services and school districts from interfering in parents’ rights, despite concerns that it could end up hurting the privacy rights of LGBTQ youth.

Approved by a 44-5 vote, Senate Bill 143 would forbid government entities from denying parents access to certain information about their children, and from “advising, directing or coercing” a child to withhold that information from parents.

Bill author Sen. Liz Brown, R-Fort Wayne, said the bill “gives parents the rights in Indiana which most of us thought we already had.”

“We’re just making sure that government does not constrain or in any way restrict a parent’s right to direct the upbringing, religious instruction, or health of their child,” Brown said. “You need a compelling governmental interest to interfere with that relationship.”

The bill makes an exception for protecting the health and safety of a child, and for active criminal law enforcement investigations involving a parent.

It also wouldn’t allow parents to decide that their children could access procedures that are banned in Indiana, such as abortion, gender-affirming care or female genital mutilation.

“A parent can’t say they now have that right,” Brown said. “We’re not going to allow a parent to supersede us on mutilating their child or (abortion).”

The bill now moves on to the House for consideration and it still has a lengthy process to becoming law. A similar legislative effort to enshrine parental rights died in the past, though this year’s bill has support from both Republicans and Democrats.

However, there is also some bipartisan opposition, with three Republicans and two Democrats voting against it in the Senate on Monday.

Sen. Aaron Freeman, R-Indianapolis, said he worried about the bill’s unintended consequences, though he “strongly agrees” with its goals. Just five years ago, he said, the state decided at the outset of the Covid-19 pandemic that it had a compelling interest to close businesses and restrict travel. He doesn’t want the government to create more hurdles for parents in the future.

“It was a compelling government interest back then,” Freeman said. “I don’t want to make it easier for government to say, well, because it’s a compelling government interest, you have to get your children vaccinated. I don’t want to make it easier for the government to act against parents.”

Youth privacy rights vs. ‘the long arm of the state’

Some advocates have raised concerns about how the bill would impact transgender children and their families.

Christopher Daley, executive director of the Indiana ACLU, said the legislation “encroaches on the privacy rights of minors throughout the state.” The organization opposed a similar bill in the past, stating then that the legislation “could have been used to force a teacher to ‘out’ an LGBTQ student to their parents.”

But Brown, the bill’s author, said that wasn’t a concern.

“I do not believe that minors have any significant privacy rights,” Brown said, “particularly that are being invaded by this bill.”

Sen. Mike Gaskill, R-Pendleton, also was motivated by the issue of transgender youth, but supported the bill. The legislation “really hits home” where here’s from, he said.

His constituents lost custody of their child because of a disagreement over the child’s transgender identity, Gaskill said, in a case that made national news as the parents sought a ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court. But the high court ultimately declined to hear the case.

“They lost it to the long arm of the state,” Gaskill said. “This is long overdue.”

‘Parents need these kinds of protections’

Still, much of the testimony surrounding the bill related to alleged failures by DCS.

Indiana parents Grant and Myranda Phillips, for example, testified that they temporarily lost custody of their two children for nearly a year, and were kept from their children’s medical records, after they said DCS incorrectly alleged abuse of a two-month-old infant.

It turned out instead that the child was suffering with an undiagnosed connective tissue disorder and DCS eventually dismissed the case, the family said. They have since filed a lawsuit.

“We’ve been healing as a family since getting our children home, and we’re trying to use this horrible situation to bring attention to the things that are going on here in Indiana,” Grant Phillips said. “The parents going ahead of us into these situations needs these kinds of protections that we did not have.”

Though he had concerns about the bill, Freeman said its passage was a signal to DCS that the legislature wants the agency to “stay in their lane.”

A DCS spokesperson said “the Braun administration values parents’ rights and their access to information about their children.”

“DCS has had productive conversations with the bill’s author to develop language that complies with disclosure laws and court orders related to the department’s ability to release such information,” spokesperson Brian Heinemann told IndyStar.

“While we cannot comment specifically on open cases involving children or their information due to confidentiality laws,” Heinemann said, “we take all allegations of non-compliance seriously and review those for corrective action when substantiated.”

Contact senior government accountability reporter Hayleigh Colombo at hcolombo@indystar.com.