Posted in Medical Malpractice
State Senator Scott Wiener has introduced SB 934, a bill that would give survivors of conversion therapy new tools to hold licensed providers accountable through the civil court system. For anyone weighing a San Francisco medical malpractice claim tied to this kind of treatment, the proposed law is worth understanding now, before it moves further through the legislature.
What SB 934 Would Change
Conversion therapy has been rejected by every major medical and mental health association as ineffective and harmful. California banned licensed practitioners from performing it on minors back in 2012, but that ban doesn’t address what happens to people who were harmed before the law existed, or who were harmed as adults. SB 934 fills that gap by strengthening the civil remedies available to survivors.
The bill would let plaintiffs rely on established scientific consensus to prove causation in a malpractice claim. That’s a meaningful shift. Proving that a “treatment” caused psychological harm can be difficult years after the fact, and this provision gives survivors a clearer path to demonstrating the link between the therapy and their injuries.
Extended Filing Windows
SB 934 also lengthens the time survivors have to bring a claim. Under the bill, a claim could be filed at the latest of the following:
- Before age 40, if the survivor was under 18 at the time of treatment
- Within 10 years of the last session, if the survivor was over 18
- Within five years of discovering the injury caused by the treatment
That last provision matters most for many survivors. Trauma from conversion therapy often surfaces gradually, sometimes decades later, and a rigid filing deadline can shut the door on a case before someone even realizes they have one.
The full text of the bill announcement, including statements from Senator Wiener and the organizations sponsoring the legislation, is available through the Senate District 11 press release.
How Existing Malpractice Law Fits In
California already allows patients to sue a health care provider for professional negligence, generally within three years of an injury or one year of discovering it. Under California’s MICRA noneconomic damages caps, which rise on a set annual schedule, the current 2026 limits work out to $470,000 in most cases and $650,000 in wrongful death claims, though economic losses aren’t subject to those limits. SB 934 doesn’t remove these existing rules. It builds on them, giving survivors of a specific and well-documented harm more realistic timelines to act.
We’ve represented clients across the Bay Area in claims involving negligent or harmful treatment by licensed providers, and we understand how personal and difficult these cases can be to bring forward. A San Francisco medical malpractice case built around conversion therapy requires careful documentation of both the treatment and its lasting effects. That’s not something anyone should have to piece together alone.
At The Law Office of Bennett M. Cohen, our team helps clients understand what legal options may be available to them under current and proposed California law.
If you or someone you know was harmed by conversion therapy, speaking with a San Francisco, CA medical malpractice lawyer can help clarify what steps make sense next, and whether pending legislation like SB 934 could affect your case.
