SALT LAKE CITY – In March 2020, the world seemed to come to a standstill as state leaders rushed to protect Utahns from the rapidly spreading and largely mysterious new coronavirus. As part of the response, church services were limited and family members were unable to visit loved ones in health facilities.
Nearly a year later, a state legislature is trying to prevent this from ever happening again with a bill he believes will protect religious and personal freedoms, even in a state of emergency.
Rep. Cory Maloy, R-Lehi, is the sponsor of HB184, which would prevent health departments from restricting religious practice or restricting access to a church. It also prohibits a health care facility from prohibiting individuals from seeing at least one family member or spiritual advisor at a time.
“This is not to say anything negative about our health facilities or our health workers; I know that everyone has worked very, very diligently to do the right things, but we just feel strongly (about) that right to be able to have that emotional connections, ”said Maloy.
Taking proper health precautions would still be allowed under the current language of the bill, and facilities could “do anything to make sure everyone stays safe,” Maloy said, but they are not allowed visitors at all. to prohibit.
“It’s not to say we can’t make recommendations or do the right things to keep people safe, but just do it without closing those places,” he said.
In a written statement, the Utah Department of Health said it was reviewing the law and would address any issues with Maloy.
“The Utah Department of Health has a significant responsibility to respond to infectious disease outbreaks to protect the health of Utah residents,” Tom Hudachko, director of communications for the Utah Department of Health wrote in the statement.
While the bill was inspired by the state’s COVID-19 response, Maloy said he did not feel that health or other government officials were acting maliciously and acknowledged that the situation was changing quickly and was difficult to address; however, he said he feels it is important to think about the response and see if there are areas where the state could be better in the future.
“I think it’s good for us to look at what we’ve learned over the past year,” he said.
Religious impact
While Utah has not imposed restrictions on worship since the spring, other states have faced opposition to strict health guidelines applied to worship. The United States Supreme Court recently sided with religious groups in a dispute over COVID-19 restrictions in New York, ruling that the guidelines being implemented for churches were far more restrictive than the rules set for comparable secular businesses. Ahead of the ruling, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo revised restrictions in response to a lawsuit from religious organizations.
Utah initially limited in-person church services, but later allowed them under new guidelines issued in May. Since then, the state has largely avoided issuing warrants in the Utah religious sector.
In November, former Governor Gary Herbert issued a new emergency order to address hospital overcrowding, prohibiting residents from socializing with people living outside their households. Religious organizations were exempt from the order and instead encouraged to implement proper health protocols in their congregations to limit the spread.
Fortunately, Maloy said, Utah has involved its religious organizations in making important decisions about the COVID-19 response, and there are no cases similar to the problems in New York and other states; however, he felt that safeguarding religious freedoms, even in an emergency, was crucial, so he proposed the bill as a preventive measure.
“This is a preventive measure to make sure that never happens here in Utah,” said Maloy.
Religious groups in the state have largely followed health guidelines to limit the spread of COVID-19, beyond government orders. But Maloy said the “difference is that they were not forced to do this by the government” and that they were acting because “it was the right thing to do with their congregations.”
Since the outbreak of the pandemic, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has responded proactively. The worldwide church suspended the personal church service and did not immediately return to the services, even after local guidelines allowed it.
Several other religious groups have also implemented their own COVID-19 guidelines outside of state requirements. Salt Lake’s Calvary Baptist Church, for example, closed personal services after opening the services briefly.
“I just wanted to be careful,” Pastor Oscar Moses previously told KSL.com about his decision. “I didn’t want to take any chances with someone who might even catch the virus.”
The Utah-based Chabad Lubavitch has also adapted its services by implementing a hybrid system where some services are performed in person and others online to enforce public health guidelines. The congregation also hosted socially remote Hanukkah celebrations in December.
“While taking precautions, we try to be there for people in a way that makes them feel most comfortable,” Rabbi Avremi Zippel told KSL.com.
Zippel said he is grateful for the partnership the state has built with the various religious communities in addressing pandemic responses.
“That’s something we’re very grateful for here in Utah,” he said. “I know we don’t take it for granted, because I know that many of my colleagues who live in other parts of the country, in larger communities, had really let their local governments do the trick on different religious communities in what seems like completely. to be arbitrary. “
The state’s response to COVID-19 is largely based on personal responsibility, with a mandatory mask mandate not being implemented until several months after the pandemic.
For Zippel, he said he believes religious leaders should strike a balance between leading by example in times of crisis while still providing vital religious and spiritual support.
“We have to lead from the front; we have to stop when we have to stop,” he explained, pointing out that Judaism and several other religions give extreme priority to a person’s health.
On the other hand, he noted that it is important that religious leaders feel support from their local government for the service they provide to the community.
“I think that as religious leaders, we like to feel supported and recognized and recognized by our local governments for the essential services we provide to our communities,” he said. “Some people rely on their faith communities for support, for structure, for so many good things in their lives, especially when everything around them is collapsing.”
Ultimately, while Maloy said Utah has done an excellent job balancing religious freedoms while still protecting public health, he felt it was important to strengthen those rights through the law.
Protecting seniors in residential facilities
Maloy’s bill would also ban senior housing facilities to restrict family members or religious leaders from visiting residents, something common early in the pandemic in an effort to protect residents from the virus.
“The reason is that they are often very vulnerable because of their age. And locking them up where they can’t get the emotional support system of their spiritual leaders or their family is just something we don’t want to see,” said Maloy. “It’s meant to be a preventative measure to protect those rights, and we’ve seen cases in Utah where seniors – especially seniors – were away from their relatives or spiritual leaders for months at a time, and we just feel like that’s just too much of an infringement. . “
Jenny Allred, who hasn’t seen her 95-year-old grandmother for several months, said the bill is extremely important and “ absolutely must be done. ”
“The health department has focused so much on the aspect of keeping physically safe – which absolutely has to be done – but there is another very important part of that health that goes hand in hand, and that is mental and emotional health,” she said. “So I think this will help balance that out.”
When Allred’s grandmother responded to COVID-19 cases in the community, the family’s contact with the 95-year-old diminished and the family was “very concerned because we couldn’t get a hold of her.”
Eventually, the family was able to get her an Alexa machine to communicate with, but sometimes they still couldn’t contact her. In-person visits were also limited and allowed only through a glass window. Her grandmother contracted COVID-19 at one point, and Allred and other family members had a hard time contacting her for health updates as the facility was overwhelmed and staff shortages. Fortunately her grandmother has since recovered.
“I think if you go through those things, to even be able to see her personally and have that connection, to let her know that everything is going to be alright, to be able to give that love, and to be able to To feel and see that in person, I think it speaks volumes, ”Allred said.
Maloy agreed, saying this was his whole idea behind the bill: to prevent seniors from becoming isolated during a disaster.
“They can still take precautions to do everything they can to make sure everyone stays safe, but they won’t be able to just say, ‘No, no visitors should come in,’” said Maloy.
Lauren Bennett