This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Community Corner

Bill Would Require Minors Seeking Abortion To Notify Parents Or Guardians

Proposal Has Not Yet Been Granted Public Hearing

Connecticut teens need parental permission to get a tattoo, but not to have an abortion. A proposed state law would change that.

State Rep. T.R. Rowe, R-123rd, calls the current laws governing minors convoluted at best. Because of that he co-sponsored H.B. 6246, which would require minors seeking an abortion to notify their parents or guardians.

“The state is replete with instances of parental notification. A minor cannot get an aspirin at the school without parental consent, cannot get a tattoo without parental consent,” said Rowe. “The state is saying they need parental guidance when doing things to their body. Except abortion.”

Find out what's happening in Grotonwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

Currently the state requires counseling for teens 16 and under that includes a discussion about the possibility of parental notification. Should the bill be enacted, Connecticut would join 39 other states with such a law.

State Rep. Elissa Wright, D-Groton, said Connecticut's law "for more than twenty years has recognized the right of pregnant minors to make abortion decisions without unreasonable state interference." 

Find out what's happening in Grotonwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

She said the proposed change, "represents an erosion of women’s rights under settled law to choose what’s best for their own lives and their own bodies.

"The bill not only is unwarranted," she added. "It simply is not a top priority when our focus in state government now is on creating jobs and growing our economy."

State Sen. Andrew Maynard, a Democrat who serves in the 18th District, which includes Groton, said, “I have tended to be opposed to parental notification as a hindrance to a woman’s free choice, but have lately come to believe that it is appropriate under ‘normal’ circumstances.  .  . Clearly there are occasions when unhealthy family dynamics are not conducive to a parent’s involvement. It is these extenuating circumstances that make legislating on these matters especially challenging.”

State Rep. Elizabeth Ritter, Democrat serving Waterford and Montville’s 38th House district co-chairs the Public Health Committee, said the committee has yet to finalize which bills will get a public hearing.

"We're not finished raising all our bills," Ritter said. "But one of the issues with this bill, and I've spoken with T.R., is it's actual purpose."

Maynard said that while the issue of hearings is a matter for the committee chairs, he believed in this instance they are likely.

“I suspect some folks are using the issue to further their own political agenda with regard to abortion, while others have a genuine concern that young women perhaps should have some parental guidance on so significant a decision as to terminate a pregnancy,” Maynard said.

Under state law, teens seeking testing for HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases, or drug abuse counseling, don’t require parental notification or permission. They can also get mental health counseling for a certain period of time without parental notification.

“The things that he [Rowe] equates abortion with are things that are not similar, like ear piercing. Teen legal rights to sensitive health care and counseling are much stronger,” said Susan Yolen, executive director of Planned Parenthood for Southern New England.

“If this was the kind of policy that was truly in the interest of minors you would expect to see the social workers, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the X out there in force,” Yolen said. “But the only ones pushing this are the anti-abortion groups. And they are not groups that litigate for teen legal rights, or work for their health.”

The General Assembly’s Public Health Committee has yet to grant Rowe’s bill a public hearing, and that’s wrong, said state Rep. Jason Perillo, R-121st District.

“Nothing's so controversial that we can’t let people share their perspectives in a public forum,” said Perillo, a ranking member on the Public Health Committee. “In this case, people have strong opinions on both sides of the argument. Personally, I'd like to hear them.”

In 1990, when the state codified Roe v. Wade into law, it addressed the issue of minors’ rights regarding abortion. The state required teens 16 and under to receive counseling on the idea of parental notification.

Right now Connecticut is one of four states with a legislative declaration that affirmatively protects a woman’s right to choose abortion. Maine, Maryland, and Washington are the other three.

Nineteen states have mandatory waiting periods that prohibit women from getting an abortion until after receiving a state-mandated lecture or materials. Connecticut has no such provision.

Connecticut is one of 30 states with abortion-specific informed consent laws that require women receive state-mandated information and materials on fetal development, prenatal care, and adoption.

As for abortions performed in the third trimester, also called partial-birth abortion, 22 states have bans. Connecticut doesn’t.

The Hartford-based Family Institute of Connecticut is determined to see this bill through.

“With the abortion rate climbing in our state, it is more urgent than ever to pass this law!” according to its website.

However, there was a 5 percent decline in the number of abortions in the state from 2008 to 2009, according to the Connecticut Catholic Public Affairs Conference. This drop was in part because of the decrease in teen abortions.

There were 13,732 abortions performed in Connecticut during 2009. That’s down from 14,534 in 2007, according to the Connecticut Department of Public Health.

Rowe said the bill could likely include an amendment that would permit minors to go before a probate judge if they feel it’s impossible or difficult to approach her parent or guardian.

But for now Rowe said he just wants a public hearing on the proposed bill.

“I’ll be tickled pink to get a fair and open hearing,” Rowe said. “But we have never been able to get a hearing on this. Those who are pro-abortion do not want to touch this with a 10-foot pole.”

-Local Editors Bree Shrivell and Deborah Straszheim contributed to this story.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?