State chief medical officer a no-show at Nebraska gender care briefing • Nebraska Examiner

LINCOLN — The state’s chief medical officer, through his agency’s legal counsel, declined to attend a legislative briefing Thursday as requested by the Health and Human Services Committee.

The HHS Committee requested last week that Dr. Timothy Tesmer give an in-person update on the ongoing rules and regulations process regarding gender care for minors. Those provisions became law Oct. 1 through Legislative Bill 574.

State Sen. Machaela Cavanaugh of Omaha, who led opposition to LB 574, said Tesmer’s absence was disappointing, particularly when he committed to keep the committee informed.

“He has not kept that commitment,” Cavanaugh told the Nebraska Examiner.

DHHS ‘must respectfully decline’ 

State Sen. Ben Hansen of Blair, committee chair, read a letter sent just before the Thursday briefing from Bo Botelho, chief legal officer for the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services.

Hanse wrote the amendment to LB 574 delegating authority to the chief medical officer to write the rules and regulations.

Botelho’s letter told the committee that because the final regulations are currently under review by the Nebraska Attorney General’s Office, and will soon go to the Governor’s Office for final say, DHHS “must respectfully decline” to participate in the briefing.

Unanswered questions

Cavanaugh introduced LB 879 this year to repeal LB 574. She withdrew it last week just after Hansen formally requested the update briefing, stating it was mutually agreed between the two that a public briefing with Tesmer would be a “more beneficial avenue” than a public hearing that wouldn’t advance the bill. 

Cavanaugh said her intention was to get answers for concerns raised by families of transgender youths and medical providers after a Nov. 28 hearing on the regulations.

“I think that they deserve an answer as to what the thought process is behind them and what the reasoning is,” Cavanaugh said.

With a four-page document in hand, with more than two dozen questions she planned to ask Tesmer, Cavanaugh spent most of the 10-minute briefing reading the questions out loud. They ranged from whether DHHS consulted with local physicians and/or considered possible mental health impacts to Tesmer’s philosophy on gender identity patients.

Future briefing possible

Hansen noted that communication among branches of government can be difficult, and he’s hoping Thursday can begin a process of more communication as many committee members have questions and concerns, as do their constituents.

“We’re hoping this can be the start of it and we can maybe even have a briefing sometime down the road when things can get more settled,” Hansen said.

The current set of temporary gender care regulations expire in one month, the future of gender care regulations hinging upon the current drafts in the Attorney General’s Office.

Cavanaugh said any public information is good and important, and she welcomes another briefing. However, she called Botelho’s justification “ludicrous” for a process that is supposed to be public.

“That’s not a real reason,” Cavanaugh said. “It’s really unfortunate that he (Tesmer) would not come because the questions are real.”