WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

H 61

An act relating to bodily autonomy and health care decision making

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Greg Burtt and 7 co-sponsors

Defines bodily autonomy right to accept or refuse health care, vaccines, or interventions, and bars conditions or denial of care across many domains.

Read first time and referred to the Committee on Health Care
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · H 61

Summary of Bill H.61 (2025-2026) – Vermont

Purpose and intent

  • Establishes a constitutional-like recognition of bodily autonomy and the right to make one’s own health care decisions in Vermont.
  • Specifically protects an individual’s right to accept or refuse any health or medical intervention, testing, treatment, or vaccine based on religious, conscientious, or personal beliefs.
  • States a policy that the state and various entities cannot interfere with or condition rights to bodily autonomy or health care decision making on beliefs.

Key provisions and changes

  • Section 851 – Statement of Policy

    • Affirms Vermont’s recognition of bodily autonomy and the right to make health care decisions based on personal beliefs.

  • Section 852 – Coercion and Interference Prohibited

    • Prohibits denying, restricting, infringing upon, or imposing conditions on a person’s rights to bodily autonomy and health care decisions.
    • Applies to a broad set of actors and entities: state agencies, employers, businesses, nonprofits, institutions, schools, places of worship, travel carriers, licensing authorities, and other individuals and entities.
    • Prohibits actions in areas such as employment, travel, education, child care, religion, benefits, insurance, and participation in sports or recreation if based on the exercise of the right to refuse interventions or vaccines for religious, conscientious, or personal beliefs.

  • Section 852 (subsection b) – Emergency/Outbreak Context

    • Overrides contrary statutes or rules related to outbreaks or emergencies, stating that, notwithstanding such laws or directives, each individual retains the right to bodily autonomy and to make health care decisions based on personal beliefs.

  • Section 852 (subsection c) – Parental rights

    • Clarifies that the bill shall not interfere with a parent’s right to determine what is best for a minor child.

  • Section 853 – Enforcement

    • Allows individuals harmed by prohibited conduct to sue in Superior Court.
    • Potential remedies include injunctive relief, compensatory and punitive damages, costs, reasonable attorney’s fees, and other appropriate relief.

  • Section 2 – Effective Date

    • The act takes effect on passage (immediate effective date upon enactment).

Who would be affected

  • Individuals in Vermont whose health care decisions are influenced by personal, religious, or conscientious beliefs.
  • Employers, schools, spiritual organizations, travel services, licensing authorities, and other entities that might otherwise place conditions on health care participation, eligibility, or access.
  • Parents and guardians, as the bill explicitly preserves parental decision-making regarding minor children within the framework of the act.

Procedural and timeline aspects

  • Introduced by multiple representatives and referred to the House Committee on Health Care.
  • First reading occurred January 22, 2025; the bill was referred to the Health Care Committee for consideration.
  • The act purports to take effect upon passage (no separate future effective date specified).

Notable considerations

  • The bill creates broad protections against conditions or denials tied to the refusal of medical interventions, including vaccines, in many domains (employment, education, housing, benefits, travel, etc.).
  • It asserts supremacy of individual bodily autonomy even in the context of public health emergencies, which could intersect with existing public health authorities and emergency powers.
  • The language includes explicit protection for parental decisions concerning minor children, but limits it only to not being interfered with by the act’s protections (no detailed mechanism for medical decision-making conflicts in pediatrics beyond preservation of parental rights).

If you’d like, I can provide a side-by-side comparison with existing Vermont health care decision-making statutes or summarize potential legal and public health implications in more depth.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.