In Megan Egbert’s experience, it can often take dozens of calls reporting possible abuse or neglect of a child before the Department of Health and Welfare finally takes action.

The first time Egbert, now a Democratic state representative from Boise, served as a court-appointed representative for a child in foster care, the department received over 30 referrals raising concerns about that child’s safety before it began to investigate, she said Thursday.

Egbert made her point as a legislative committee met at the Capitol to consider a bill by a fellow representative, Republican Lucas Cayler of Caldwell, to limit instances in which criminal charges can be brought against parents for denying medical care or other basic needs to their children.

Cayler told the House Health and Welfare Committee that the reporting process could strip away parents’ rights to choose their own children’s health care. He said families would suffer if someone — intentionally or not — made a false report of medical neglect against a parent that led to “unwarranted investigations” or the removal of a child from her home.

Cayler told committee members that he has heard of cases in which parents were reported for neglect because their children had diaper rash or a runny nose.

Under state law, it’s a felony to neglect to provide basic needs or medical care to a child. On Thursday, Cayler sought to narrow the state’s definition of “medical neglect” to exclude cases when parents declined a risky treatment that offered only limited benefits or sought alternative medical care for a child.

But Cayler’s proposal didn’t define that alternative care, or even whether such an alternative provider would need to have medical training.

“It’s just saying that they could see anybody,” Egbert said. “I could take it to, you know, my uncle.”

Other committee members raised concerns about how such a proposal would play out: What if a child had diabetes but the parents were willing to give him only herbal treatments, rather than insulin? What if a child had cancer but parents took her only to a Reiki healer instead of an oncologist?

In the first case, Cayler said, the parents could still be found negligent under his proposed definition. In the second, he said, they could not be — though he didn’t specify why.

“This does not in any way infringe upon the duties of a parent to provide health care for their child,” he said. “We’re trying to make sure that the parent has the ultimate authority to determine the child’s health care within reasonable expectations.”

Rep. Ilana Rubel, D-Boise, said she worried the bill would give parents a “get-out-of-jail-free” card — that as long as they eventually took their child to see a doctor, they wouldn’t be held accountable for how long they may have waited.

“You could allow things to progress to an unbelievable level where a child has a festering, gangrenous wound,” she said in committee. “You could leave it there for months and months, and then if at any point on, you know, month three of this festering wound, you finally appear, it gets you off the hook for all medical neglect.”

It’s not clear how widespread fake or overblown reports are. Health and Welfare doesn’t track them, Cayler told the Idaho Statesman, so he doesn’t know.

The vote over whether to introduce Cayler’s bill failed with a tie vote — unusual for the Idaho Legislature’s early screening process, where committees approve the introduction of most measures proposed by lawmakers. The proposal will not receive a full committee hearing.

Rep. Dori Healey, R-Boise, told Cayler she’s been on the other side of the issue.

“I feel that anytime we discourage reporting, that’s when bad things happen,” said Healey, who is a nurse. “I don’t ever want to be on the side of discouraging somebody from reporting that could potentially save a life.”

_____

©2026 The Idaho Statesman. Visit idahostatesman.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.