03/09/2009 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB35 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 35 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
March 9, 2009
1:08 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Jay Ramras, Chair
Representative Nancy Dahlstrom, Vice Chair
Representative John Coghill
Representative Bob Lynn
Representative Max Gruenberg
Representative Lindsey Holmes
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Carl Gatto
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 35
"An Act relating to notice and consent for a minor's abortion;
relating to penalties for performing an abortion; relating to a
judicial bypass procedure for an abortion; relating to coercion
of a minor to have an abortion; relating to reporting of
abortions performed on minors; amending Rule 220, Alaska Rules
of Appellate Procedure, and Rule 20, Alaska Probate Rules,
relating to judicial bypass for an abortion; and providing for
an effective date."
- Heard & Held
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 35
SHORT TITLE: NOTICE & CONSENT FOR MINOR'S ABORTION
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) COGHILL
01/20/09 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/9/09
01/20/09 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/20/09 (H) JUD, FIN
03/09/09 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
WITNESS REGISTER
MANDY O'NEAL COLE
Douglas, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments during discussion of
HB 35.
LESLEY THOMPSON
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 35.
LATANYA SEMONES
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 35.
REV ORION
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 35.
CHERYL HUMME
Barrow, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 35.
BYRON CHARLES (ph)
(No address provided)
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments during discussion of
HB 35.
JAN WHITEFIELD, M.D., OB/GYN, Section Chair
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments during discussion of
HB 35.
OSCAR AVELLANEDA
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments during discussion of
HB 35.
LORI SIEBE
Kodiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 35.
ERICA THOMPSON
Kodiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 35.
KATHLEEN GUSTAFSON, President
Board of Directors
Kachemak Bay Family Planning Clinic (KBFPC)
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 35.
MARY JO SPOTTS
Sterling, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 35.
AUTUMN LEACH, Attorney at Law
Soldotna, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 35.
PATRICIA ODDEN
Big Lake, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 35.
CLOVER SIMON, MSW, Vice President, Alaska
Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest (PPGNW)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 35.
KATHERINE FOREST
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 35.
TIANA ODDEN
Big Lake, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments during discussion of
HB 35.
DEBRA CALDERA
Alaska Public Health Association (ALPHA)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 35.
JULIE BARRY
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 35.
MONIQUE KARAGANIS, M.D., Pediatrics
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments during discussion of
HB 35.
BRYN WINTERBERGER
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments during discussion of
HB 35.
KEN WINTERBERGER
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 35.
MARGARET GADSDEN
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Urged the committee to vote against HB 35.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:08:19 PM
CHAIR JAY RAMRAS called the House Judiciary Standing Committee
meeting to order at 1:08 p.m. Representatives Ramras,
Dahlstrom, Coghill, Lynn, and Holmes were present at the call to
order. Representative Gruenberg arrived as the meeting was in
progress.
HB 35 - NOTICE & CONSENT FOR MINOR'S ABORTION
1:08:32 PM
CHAIR RAMRAS announced that the only order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 35, "An Act relating to notice and consent for a
minor's abortion; relating to penalties for performing an
abortion; relating to a judicial bypass procedure for an
abortion; relating to coercion of a minor to have an abortion;
relating to reporting of abortions performed on minors; amending
Rule 220, Alaska Rules of Appellate Procedure, and Rule 20,
Alaska Probate Rules, relating to judicial bypass for an
abortion; and providing for an effective date."
1:08:44 PM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL, speaking as the sponsor, explained that
HB 35 pertains to notice and consent for a minor's abortion, and
that Alaska's existing parental consent statute was found to be
unconstitutional by the Alaska Supreme Court [in State v.
Planned Parenthood of Alaska]. He suggested that HB 35 will
outline the "standing" parents should have in a minor child's
decision regarding abortion, and will provide an exemption for
situations involving "bad-acting" parents; the question of how
[the bill] shall provide for these things in a constitutional
manner is still to be addressed, however. He offered his
understanding that the Alaska Supreme Court found that when
compared to a minor's right of privacy, there was not enough of
a compelling state interest for mandating parental consent for
an abortion, and said he disagrees with that decision as a
matter of public policy, particularly given that parental
consent requirements are in place with regard to other medical
procedures. He proffered that the language in HB 35 will give
parents a say in their minor daughter's decision to have an
abortion and allow them to protect her from her own immaturity.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said he feels so strongly that parents
should be an integral part of [a pregnant minor's decision to
have an abortion], that he is willing to [challenge the court's
ruling via HB 35], particularly given that the court only
characterized the existing parental consent statute as
constitutionally suspect. And although the court did point out
that there is a least-restrictive means of involving the
parents, that being to provide notice, the court still erected a
barrier, he opined, between a pregnant child and her parents
with regard to consenting to an abortion. He offered his belief
that this is the only place where such a barrier exists. Under
the bill, the parents will have to have been given notice and
must give consent in order for their minor daughter to get an
abortion.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL explained that the bill contains
exemptions whereby a pregnant minor can seek an abortion without
providing her parents with notice or obtaining their consent.
Situations involving incest or abuse, an emancipated minor, a
married minor, a minor serving in the armed services, or the
court's lack of response to a judicial bypass request, could all
result in a pregnant minor obtaining an abortion without her
parents' consent. The judicial bypass procedure provided for in
HB 35, he opined, follows U.S. Supreme Court [rulings], whereas
the Alaska Supreme Court went too far when it "trumped all
parental rights." At the very least, he concluded, parents
should be included in the discussion and involved in the
decision.
1:16:49 PM
MANDY O'NEAL COLE, noting that she has worked with youth in the
past, said that as a parent, she understands that HB 35 was
offered in good faith. She is of the belief, she said, that it
is her responsibility and absolute obligation to provide an
environment in which her children will feel that they can come
to her and discuss difficult issues, and said she hopes that
should one of her children face an issue as big as an unwanted
pregnancy, that he/she would come to her for advice, and that
this will prove true for other families as well. She said that
as a good parent, she wants to have faith in her children that
they will communicate with her without there being legislation
mandating that they do so.
MS. O'NEAL COLE said that she has known girls who've become
pregnant and felt pushed into a corner such that they've then
consumed [harmful] substances in the hopes of terminating their
unwanted pregnancy "under the radar." This is a very scary
thing to witness, and thus the concept of putting any more
barriers between a girl and a safe, legal abortion is really
frightening to her, she remarked, adding her belief that doing
so will increase the likelihood that a pregnant girl will
attempt to induce an abortion on her own because she will feel
as though she doesn't have any other options.
MS. O'NEAL COLE opined that the problem with HB 35's judicial
bypass provision is that those who might make use of it are
living with parents who are perpetrating violence, threats,
humiliation, and coercion on them; girls living under such
conditions, therefore, although not legally prevented from
seeking judicial bypass, are emotionally prohibited from doing
so. These are girls who might not have the confidence to go
before a judge and say they are pregnant and afraid of their
parents, since girls who are afraid to talk to their parents
will probably also be afraid to get involved with the judicial
system and speak to people in positions of authority, especially
when they've been victimized.
MS. O'NEAL COLE said that while she believes that HB 35 is the
result of members' interest in Alaska families, she also
believes that there are other ways "to go about this" such as by
encouraging families to communicate openly, and by encouraging
sex education and other healthful practices; in this way, there
will be less need for abortions and, when an abortion is
necessary, teenage girls will feel safe to either speak with
their parents or get an abortion on their own if speaking with
their parents is not a [safe option].
1:21:49 PM
[Chair Ramras turned the gavel over to Vice Chair Dahlstrom.]
MS. O'NEAL COLE, in response to questions, reiterated that she
is a parent, relayed that she works for "victims' services" and
runs an offender program, and said she would agree that
sometimes children, regardless of the facts before them, cannot
think straight.
VICE CHAIR DAHLSTROM noted that when her now-grown children were
younger, when they were afraid to come speak to her about
something [they did], it was because they knew there would be
consequences. She offered her understanding that studies
indicate that children's brains develop at different rates -
males differently from females, and differently as a result of
different life experiences - and that they aren't really capable
of making [fully rational] decisions until they are in their
20s. She said she questions what happens to the girl who gets
an abortion without telling her parents simply because she
wanted to avoid getting into trouble with her parents; that girl
then has to live with that decision for the rest of her life.
MS. O'NEAL COLE said:
I do see that as a problem, and ... my heart would
break for any girl who went through that. But I guess
the bottom line for me is that [on the one hand]
there's that child who may regret not having had that
baby when she was a teenager, versus the child who was
afraid to go to her parents [and would] smoke and
drink and try to cause her own abortion - because it's
a scary thing. [And] ... I've seen girls who believed
that the more that they can drink, the more likely
they will be to miscarry, and so she dies, the baby
dies, [or] they both are injured in a way that is a
lifelong disaster and tragedy for that family. ...
Any woman, whether she's 16 or 43, may, down the line,
have second thoughts about having had an abortion. As
a mother, I can see that. ... I love my children and I
think, ... what if I didn't have them? ... It'd be
horrible for me - but at the same time I also think,
what if I was ... a teenager in a relationship with an
abusive boyfriend who had coerced me into having sex,
and then I have absent parents or neglectful parents
or scary parents? In any of those cases I think,
wouldn't it be better for me to have that faith that
the State of Alaska believes me to be a good enough
... steward of my own body to make the right choice
for myself?
And while ... I certainly couldn't ... [say] that
there won't ever be any regrets, I think that's a
choice that every individual makes whenever they
exercise their free will - that there could be regrets
eventually - but in the moment, if that was the right
decision, then that was the right decision, and it's
hard for me or for any of you to know, in that moment,
... what's happening for that girl.
MS. O'NEAL COLE, in response to a question, said she is pro-
choice, believes that a woman has the right to decide what
happens with her body, and has supported abortion rights since
she was [a teenager]. She added that her mother was pro-life
but never stopped her from having her own beliefs. In response
to further questions, she offered her belief that once a baby is
born, it has all the rights of a person, but until then, the
right of the woman to control her body and anything within it is
supreme, and that a fetus is part of a woman's body until it is
able to survive outside of the womb.
1:29:30 PM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL acknowledged that somewhere along the
line, the pregnant girl will make a decision, and his preference
is for the parents to be a part of that decision-making process;
his concern is that other individuals and advocacy groups will
end up trumping the parents.
MS. O'NEAL COLE remarked:
I think that as adults, we often try ... [to] make
thoughtful suggestions and thoughtful rules for our
children; I think that that is 100 percent the truth.
And I think that there will be people who advocate for
different things, all the time, but that the beauty of
being an independent person is that you get to see
that there are different opinions out there and [get
to] choose the one what feels right for you at the
time. So perhaps ... a youngster would go to [an
organization such as] Planned Parenthood to learn
about an abortion, but perhaps that same youngster
would talk to their parent, as ... I've had family
members do, ... about that as well, and take in all of
the information. So ... I think my thoughts on that
are that too much education is never a problem, [that]
simply making informed choices with all of the
available options open to you is probably the best way
to go.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG, mentioning that he is pro-choice,
noted that the age of consent for marriage is different than the
age of consent for an abortion, and that the legal and
constitutional basis for the right to decide whether or not to
have an abortion is one application of the theory that a woman
has a right to decide what to do with her own body. Isn't the
right to marry also the right to decide what to do with one's
own body?
MS. O'NEAL COLE said she does see some parallels between the age
of consent for marriage and the age of consent for an abortion.
When considering the issue of consent, the safety and autonomy
of an individual must also be considered.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG, remarking that the age of consent for
marriage is 18 whereas the age of consent for an abortion is 17,
noted that under AS 25.05.011(a)(3), a person [under the age of
18] doesn't need his/her parents' consent if the person is on
active duty in the armed services. The bill, however, doesn't
seem to contain a similar exemption.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL offered his understanding that there is
such an exemption. He also noted that a youngster can seek
emancipation at the age of 16.
[Vice Chair Dahlstrom returned the gavel to Chair Ramras.]
1:35:17 PM
LESLEY THOMPSON, after relaying that she has both worked for and
volunteered with various youth groups and church groups and
therefore has a good sense of what boys and girls "are about,"
said that she is very much in support of HB 35. She elaborated:
Having worked with so many teenagers over my life, I
don't think they're ready to make the rational, moral
decision that this will (indisc.) their life for the
rest of their life. I've talked to many people my age
who've had abortions, and they ... have a hard time
coming to grips with what they did, and many times
they'll even think about birthdays every year. I
think it's a very difficult decision, and I think a
lot of times kids are very concerned [about] ...
talking with their parents about something like this,
but more times than not [I've] found that the parents
can really step up to the plate and really make a
difference and really help that girl ... - or the boy
- through the situation.
1:37:17 PM
LATANYA SEMONES, noting that she is Alaska Native and was born
and raised in a small community, said she is opposed HB 35. She
went on to say:
I hope to raise a family in Alaska someday, my husband
and I, and although I'll do everything I can to create
an open, healthy relationship with my child or my
children, I know that there is a possibility that once
my children become teens, they may not always be
comfortable coming to me. So in that instance, I
would hope to see that my daughter would still have
access to the information she seeks for her own health
and safety. I'm also concerned about the teenagers in
rural communities and how this bill will affect them.
My family is from the [Pribilof Islands] and I still
have many family members who live on the remote
islands. For such a sensitive issue that may or may
not involve abuse, it's important for the government
to ensure the safety of the teenagers in rural
communities, instead of forcing communications and
relationships that ... may not even exist ... or be
healthy.
I can understand that in this bill there's an
opportunity for a court process so the teenager can
bypass parental consent, but you have to understand
how intimidating that would be, especially for a
teenager in a rural community where that opportunity
is even more complicated. How would a relative of
mine [on] ... Saint George Island handle this
situation if she didn't want to, or couldn't, tell her
parents, for whatever reason? Would she have to find
a boat to the neighboring island? What lengths would
she have to go through? It's irrational to think a
young, scared, possibly abused teenager in rural
Alaska would be able to get the help she needs were
this bill to pass. Any risk to a teenager isn't worth
forced communication with parents.
I'm completely supportive of healthy family
communication, but the bad outweighs the good here
because this bill would put Alaska's teenagers at risk
of not seeking help in a timely manner or, worse, [of]
resorting to dangerous measures on their own. This
bill does nothing to protect the health and safety of
Alaska's teens, as it's not addressing a relevant
issue, because teenagers are talking with their
parents - they're talking with other adults in their
lives as well. This bill isn't solving a real
problem; it's creating problems ... in an already
problematic situation, and the government shouldn't
just dictate to whom teenagers are talking - it should
foster opportunities for teenagers to get the
information they seek in a timely manner, and that's
the only way to keep them safe and healthy.
1:40:17 PM
REV ORION said that he opposes HB 35. He indicated that those
families with good communication skills won't need legislation
such as HB 35 because the parents will be involved in their
pregnant child's decision. Noting that he is a single father,
he said he feels that it is his job to have that level of
communication with his son, and that he very much hopes that his
son would feel comfortable coming to him regardless of what the
situation is knowing that he will still try to do the best thing
he can for him. If his son starts making decisions whereby he
is putting himself in danger and doesn't communicate with him
about the consequences, that is his failure as a father, he
opined. He said he doesn't want or need any legislation passed
[mandating communication], nor does he feel it would be good
public policy to force girls in an already difficult situation
to struggle through even more obstacles.
MR. ORION opined that the person who must carry a pregnancy to
term and give birth should be the person who retains the right
to decide whether or not to do so, and that to take away that
person's individual right to control her own body is un-American
and un-democratic. He surmised that the goal of HB 35 is to
prevent teenage girls from making the decision to get an
abortion, since nothing in the bill addresses the issue of
parents who would make that same decision for their 15-year-old
daughters, for example. He characterized such a decision as
wise more often than not. In conclusion, he said he thinks that
HB 35 is a bad bill that will create more problems and help
nothing.
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM asked Mr. Orion whether he would wish
to be notified that he was a potential grandfather before an
abortion was carried out.
MR. ORION said that his wish is that he would have done a good
enough job of raising his son that his son would always come and
speak with him about serious issues; however, if his son didn't
feel that he could communicate with him in a cooperative manner,
then he would rather that his son would be able to make his own
decisions, because that would be his own failure as a father.
He added that he trusts and hopes that he will always keep
himself open and understanding enough that his son will always
feel he can come to him. If his son, when he becomes a
teenager, gets involved with a teenage girl and they conceive a
baby but don't feel that they ought to have that baby and
neither feel that they can speak to their parents about it, Mr.
Orion said that that would be his and the girl's parents'
failure as parents. Because worst case scenarios exist, he
opined, "this has to be allowed." There are parents who,
instead of actually communicating, simply pound their children
with religious dogma, and there are parents who pay no attention
to their children; such parents haven't fostered the kind of
communication necessary in today's society. Therefore, he said,
he doesn't think that the children of such parents should
involve their parents in a discussion about an unwanted
pregnancy.
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM argued that although sometimes religion
"plays into it," so do one's own life experiences and the
experiences of friends. She said she's known men who've learned
later on in life that a girl they'd gotten pregnant when they
were younger had chosen to have an abortion, and those men
expressed regret and grief over not having known about it. She
noted that she's heard from many people who've said that even if
their children do choose to get an abortion, they want to be
involved and be there for their children - they don't want their
children to go through such an invasive medical procedure
without them being present, because they want to be able to help
their children with the mental, emotional, and physical
consequences, particularly given that medical complications
could arise. She pointed out that there are a lot of laws
making parents liable for there minor children's actions.
MR. ORION said he understands that he is responsible for his
minor child's actions and accepts that responsibility gladly; if
his son were to destroy someone's property, for example, then he
and his son, together, would deal with the consequences.
Fulfilling that responsibility requires that he be on his toes
when it comes to raising his son, he remarked, but what he
doesn't want is for the government to take control of a person's
body. He added, "I don't care about the regret of a [potential]
grandparent who's child had an abortion, because what I care
about is what's going on in that young girl's head at the time
and her ability to make a decision about her life - ... which
she's already made by having unprotected sex or sex [wherein]
... the protection did not work; ... now it's on her, now it's
her responsibility, now she has control of her life."
MR. ORION said that's the difference between needing parental
consent to give an aspirin at school and parental consent to
have an abortion. With an abortion what's at issue is the
girl's whole life as well as the life of the being inside her,
and that unborn child, if it is allowed to be born, will then be
[being raised by] a 15-year-old mother, for example, who has
parents with whom she can't talk. That's not setting somebody
up for success, he opined, and said he would rather hear stories
about 15-year-old girls who did have an abortion, learned their
lesson from that, and moved on to become intelligent women, and,
then, when they were ready to have a child, did so - that is a
success story. That is more important than someone looking back
when he/she is 60, for example, and regretting that his/her
daughter chose an abortion, thus denying him/her the opportunity
to raise a grandchild.
MR. ORION, in response to comments and a question, said that
although he has met wonderful people who [are very religious],
he thinks that it is common for religion to be used as an
overbearing force in the lives of a lot of children in that
there is no forgiveness but instead only punishment. He assured
the committee that he is not saying that there is a blanket
problem with religion itself, but rather his point is that even
young girls need to have the same options available to them as
older women with regard to what happens with their bodies. In
conclusion, he reminded the committee that religion has been
used [in the past by some] to justify slavery and the slaughter
of Natives.
1:56:10 PM
CHERYL HUMME said she would be speaking in opposition to HB 35.
She surmised that it is the sponsor's desire that there be good
communication within families in Alaska, and said that while she
applauds that desire, it doesn't reflect reality. Alaska has
such significant rates of child abuse, domestic violence, and
sexual assault that to assume that all children will feel
comfortable approaching their parents when making such a crucial
decision is just wrong. Alaska's youth involved in such
circumstances should not be further penalized by making them
overcome yet another hurdle in their lives - that of having to
obtain parental consent in order to have an abortion. Can
healthy families really be legislated? Noting that many people
often express concern that a teenage girl may later on in life
regret her decision to have an abortion, she asked, "What about
the effect on her life if she becomes a teen mother - what about
the effect on both of their lives, the mother and the baby?"
The reality is that teen mothers have less money for the rest of
their lives, and that children who grow up in poverty do worse
in school.
MS. HUMME, concurring that it's the desire of most parents to be
there for their children, questioned whether the committee is
really willing to take away a teenage girl's right to control
her own body. She said she doesn't believe that that's the
right approach to take. In response to questions, she cautioned
against likening the treatment of a migraine with the concept of
having control over one's own body when it comes to reproduction
issues - to make such an argument is to minimize the situation.
She pointed out that under current law in Alaska, a minor can
get birth control without parental consent, adding that she
feels that having to obtain parental consent in order to be
administered aspirin by a school nurse is completely different.
2:00:46 PM
BYRON CHARLES (ph) characterized what's being discussed today as
a very, very delicate subject, and surmised that the people's
constitutional rights to due process are also at issue. He
remarked that ever since the State of Alaska began distributing
permanent fund dividend (PFD) checks, it seems as though there
are a lot of children having children. Education is a critical
component, he opined, but it appears that classes on parenting
skills are only being offered to minors after they become
parents. He relayed that he has an 18-year-old son with a 1-
year-old son himself. He added, "Tough love, as we all know, is
easier said than done when it comes to dealing with ... [teenage
pregnancy]; all we can do is try to be there for moral support
the best way we can." In conclusion, he offered his belief that
the issues being discussed today should be required as part of
the [high school] education curriculum, including parenting
skills, and that more research needs to be conducted before
action is taken on HB 35.
2:03:57 PM
JAN WHITEFIELD, M.D., OB/GYN, Section Chair, American College of
Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), relayed that he would be
providing information produced by the ACOG and not his own
opinion. The April 2006 ACOG Committee Opinion Number 330 says
in part: "... parental consent, although preferred, should not
be required. If parental consent is not obtained, consent for
the examination should be obtained from the minor and indicated
in the medical record." He explained that the aforementioned
statement pertains to a Colposcopy, an examination tool used in
the diagnosis and treatment of cervical cancer. He then relayed
that the ACOG Statement of Policy as issued by the ACOG
Executive Board, reaffirmed July 1987, says in part:
Statement on Providing Effective Contraception to
Minors ... The laws of some states indirectly prohibit
this service for minors and thereby prevent the
gynecologist from serving them or place the physician
in legal jeopardy if he does so. ... These restricting
legal barriers should be removed even in the case of
an unemancipated minor who refuses to involve her
parents. A pregnancy should not be the price she has
to pay for contraception. On the other hand, in
counseling the patient, all possible efforts should be
made to involve her parents. ...
DR. WHITEFIELD then relayed that the ACOG Statement of Policy as
issued by the ACOG Executive Board, last reaffirmed July 2007,
says in part, "Abortion Policy ... Termination of pregnancy
before viability is a medical matter between the patient and
physician, subject to the physician's clinical judgment, the
patient's informed consent and the availability of appropriate
facilities ...." He remarked that the aforementioned policy
speaks about the patient and the physician, and specifically
doesn't speak about the parent.
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES noted that a violation of HB 35 would
subject a physician to a fine of $1,000, or a prison sentence of
up to five years, or both. She asked Dr. Whitefield to comment.
DR. WHITEFIELD said his goal in speaking was to provide the
committee with information produced by the ACOG - information
that members could take into consideration during its
deliberations; therefore, he is not yet prepared to make a
statement regarding his thoughts on HB 35 specifically, but
would attempt to do so at a later date if the committee would
allow. In response to questions, he explained that the
documents he was reading from are documents produced by the ACOG
in an effort to assist obstetricians and gynecologist in their
practice; that in instances where the patient is considering
terminating a pregnancy, he provides some counseling; and that
if committee members have specific questions, he would attempt
to research specific information from the ACOG to address those
questions. He reiterated that he did not come prepared to
provide his own opinion on the bill but instead simply intended
to provide the committee with factual information from the ACOG.
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM expressed interest in learning who Dr.
Whitefield seeks payment from in instances where the patient is
a minor, and who becomes financially liable if no payment is
forthcoming.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN expressed interest in learning whether
parents are notified if complications arise during an abortion
procedure.
DR. WHITEFIELD, once again reiterating that he was not speaking
on his own behalf but instead on behalf of the ACOG, asked that
members provide their specific questions in writing so that he
can obtain specific written responses from the ACOG.
CHAIR RAMRAS told Dr. Whitefield that he shouldn't expect to
receive anything in writing from the committee.
2:15:51 PM
OSCAR AVELLANEDA pointed out that regardless of the sponsor's
hope that there will be communication within families, in
today's society, discussing issues such as sex and abortion is
considered scandalous, and he is therefore questioning the
efficacy of a bill such as HB 35, particularly given all the
pressure and anxiety associated with telling one's parents about
an unwanted pregnancy without knowing how they will react - a
bill such as HB 35 could instead just make the situation worse.
He also pointed out that even a quick Internet search on how to
induce an abortion resulted in some absolutely scary advice.
"That is something the next generation is going to do," he
predicted: minors will just research on their own how to induce
an abortion themselves. Although communication is important,
HB 35 is not the appropriate bill to ensure that communication
takes place, he concluded.
[Chair Ramras turned the gavel over to Vice Chair Dahlstrom.]
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked Mr. Avellaneda whether he thinks
that passage of HB 35 will result in children talking to their
parents.
MR. AVELLANEDA surmised that children who already have some sort
of open communication with their parents will gather up the
courage to talk to their parents about an unwanted pregnancy,
but that children who don't or who are afraid of their parents
will be pushed by HB 35's requirements into seeking ways of
dealing with an unwanted pregnancy on their own.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked Mr. Avellaneda whether he thinks
it's good public policy "to encourage people to evade the law in
that manner."
MR. AVELLANEDA suggested that instead of passing such a law, the
legislature should instead focus on education efforts
encouraging communication. In response to a question, he shared
his belief that at some point, the parents of a pregnant minor
should be involved.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL offered his belief that the court ruling
in Planned Parenthood of Alaska has resulted in parents "never
having a right to know" unless their child decides to involve
them.
MR. AVELLANEDA observed that communication and consent are two
different things. Communication involves open dialog and an
acknowledgment of the minor's choice, whereas HB 35 mandates
that the minor obtain consent before getting an abortion. He
relayed that when he was young, he withheld some information
from his parents until he felt that the time was right and that
it would be safe to disclose the information.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL surmised that Mr. Avellaneda is of the
belief that parents should "never have a right to know" unless
the child is amenable.
MR. AVELLANEDA concurred.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said he disagrees with that belief.
2:22:38 PM
LORI SIEBE opined that in an ideal world, all kids would talk to
their parents. Unfortunately, that's not the way the world is.
Furthermore, it's not just children living in abusive situations
who don't want to talk with their parents - children who are
high achievers and love their parents dearly are sometimes also
afraid to discuss certain things with their parents. She spoke
of a couple - the Bells of Indiana - who lost their daughter -
Becky - in 1988 to a botched abortion because she was too
humiliated and afraid of disappointing her parents to tell them
that she was pregnant, and Indiana at the time had a [mandatory]
consent law. The Bells, since then, have been giving talks and
providing information so that other parents don't have to go
through what they did; again, even though the Bells were an open
and loving family and totally supportive of their daughter, she
did not want to disappoint them, and it killed her.
MS. SIEBE indicated that in addition to her concern about those
children living in abusive situations, she opposes HB 35 because
it will put [pregnant girls] in Alaska in a difficult situation.
Consider the time factor - Alaska is a remote, large state, and
many communities in Alaska just don't have the necessary
services available and so travel would be involved, thus
delaying decisions that must be made in a timely manner.
Becoming pregnant while still a young teenager is not an easy
situation; it's not a situation any girl or boy wants to get
into. Ideally, children will talk to their parents without this
proposed law - they shouldn't have to be forced by law to
communicate with their parents. She mentioned that Dr.
Whitefield delivered her baby, and characterized him as an
excellent physician and a great advocate for women's health.
MS. SIEBE surmised that the point of HB 35 is to protect
Alaska's children - protect Alaska's girls - but said she feels
that instead the safety of those children would be jeopardized
by the passage of the bill. She said she would love for her
daughter to speak to her on her own if she ever found herself
pregnant, and hopes that she has given her daughter reason to.
Ms. Siebe acknowledged, though, that her daughter may choose not
to speak with her, and said she would honor that decision
regardless that she may not be happy with it. She asked the
committee to protect Alaska's children by not passing the bill,
to instead hope that children will talk to their parents even
though not required to by law.
[Vice Chair Dahlstrom returned the gavel to Chair Ramras.]
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES surmised that one of the dangers of the
bill is that pregnant minors will do whatever it takes to abort
a fetus once they have decided not to give birth, and therefore
if they feel they can't face their parents or the judicial
system, they will instead simply seek other means of aborting
regardless that they themselves may be harmed in the process.
MS. SIEBE concurred, surmising that girls will be seeking
information on how to abort from "the weirdest places." She
offered her recollection that when she was a teenager, fellow
teenagers would give advice on how to abort. Girls would go to
any lengths to end an unwanted pregnancy regardless that they
weren't following safe advice.
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES, noting that HB 35 requires parental
consent, not just parental notification, expressed concern that
the "veto power" being given to parents via HB 35, even when
their children do come talk to them, will cause girls to harm
themselves while attempting to abort without parental consent.
MS. SIEBE agreed.
2:28:53 PM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said he disagrees with the assumption
that every parent will give his/her children bad advice or that
forcing children to accept a decision they don't agree with is
always bad. He added, "I think this particular bill gives
avenues for those who have that kind of a problem," and asked
Ms. Siebe whether she assumes that parents will always veto a
pregnant minor's decision [to have a abortion].
MS. SIEBE said no, surmising that every situation will be
unique. Instead, her point about HB 35, she relayed, is that it
will force kids who are living in a bad situation to lose
valuable time as they attempt to seek safe healthcare in a
timely manner. Again, ideally, kids will talk to their parents
without this bill, whereas HB 35 is telling people how they have
to act, and the people who will be most negatively affected by
this bill are the children who don't have communication with
their parents.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL opined, however, that [the court ruling]
is telling parents how to act and is empowering those who would
counsel pregnant minors without parental involvement or parental
consent.
MS. SIEBE surmised that Representative Coghill believes that any
counselor advocating for women's health will tell a pregnant
minor to get an abortion. That may not be the case, she pointed
out; instead the pregnant minor may not want to have an abortion
after speaking with a physician. She said it appears as though
legislators aren't focusing on the safety of the children who
may find themselves pregnant but are instead just getting
wrapped up in debating the abortion issue itself. Since it's
the girl's decision whether to keep the baby, she should be
allowed the option of making that decision with the assistance
of a doctor, without the stress and undue burden of having to
talk to parents who aren't supportive or who aren't open to
discussing the issue. Although a girl might have great parents
and would talk to them anyway, she should be given the benefit
of the doubt, Ms. Siebe concluded.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said, "My contention is that those who
have gone to every supreme court in the United States [and] ...
pushed abortion in every venue going are the very ones that are
counseling our young daughters to get abortions."
MS. SIEBE countered that the trend she is seeing is that there
is more counseling for adoption, rather than for abortion,
adding, "I feel you're wrong there." She went on to say, "I
think it's important that a child gets all information, and that
all is available to her, and it's not our decision to make for
her, but to give her the proper tools she needs to make a
decision that's right for her."
2:33:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked Ms. Siebe whether she believes
that if society makes it more difficult for a young person
without financial means to obtain an abortion, that it's then
also society's obligation to pay for that person's education so
that she can then earn the money to raise a child, and to pay
for their healthcare. What is society's obligation once the
child is born?
MS. SIEBE opined that that issue is not at all relevant to the
discussion on whether to mandate that a pregnant minor notify
her parents regarding a reproductive matter.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG pointed out, though, that as
legislators, they need to consider the implications and full
ramifications of the laws they pass; with regard to HB 35, that
includes considering how it will affect society, what will
happen to the young mother and child if the child is born, how
that child will be able to survive economically, educationally,
and in good health, and how the young mother will be able to
afford to raise that child.
MS. SIEBE asked whether Representative Gruenberg is questioning
whether the parents of the pregnant minor should be required to
pay for the upbringing of the baby if they force her to give
birth, as opposed to the pregnant minor going on public
assistance.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG clarified that he's not asking whether
just the parents of the pregnant minor have that obligation but
whether society has that obligation as well.
[Chair Ramras turned the gavel over to Vice Chair Dahlstrom.]
MS. SIEBE reiterated that her concern revolves around the issue
of pregnant minors possibly being injured because they won't
talk to their parents and instead make bad medical decisions all
on their own.
2:37:25 PM
ERICA THOMPSON, noting that she currently works as a substitute
teacher at both the middle school and the high school [in
Kodiak], said that the rate of teen pregnancy is astounding.
She offered her understanding that in Alaska, the age of consent
for becoming sexually active is 16, and that the goal of HB 35
is to lower the number of abortions performed in Alaska.
Regardless that that is a legitimate goal, as a state and as a
government, she opined, "we cannot mandate healthy and open
family communication," particularly given the high rates of
sexual abuse [of a minor crimes] and instances of incest in
rural communities - it is not feasible to require pregnant girls
to talk with their parents about having an abortion.
MS. THOMPSON observed that whether a girl is afraid of
dishonoring her family, or of disappointing her parents, or of
disclosing what she's been subjected to, until the problems of
sexual abuse and incest in Alaska's communities are resolved,
the government shouldn't mandate that a young girl, who is
pregnant through no fault of her own and who doesn't want to
give birth, go in front of judge and prove why she should have
the right to get an abortion. Teenagers in [Kodiak] are giving
birth at the age of 14; this means that they are getting
pregnant during the summer after their 8th-grade year at school.
This illustrates the extreme need for comprehensive sexual
education that includes information about all forms of birth
control in addition to information about abstinence - a
completely respectable choice. So many students are not getting
adequate birth-control education, or are getting it too late,
that the State shouldn't, at this point in time, mandate that
girls have to be 18 in order get an abortion without parental
consent.
[Vice Chair Dahlstrom returned the gavel to Chair Ramras.]
MS. THOMPSON said that with the young women with whom she is
speaking, she is finding that in some cases, they are already
sexually active but are not talking with their parents about
having become so, and this illustrates that there is a lack of
trust within those families. So regardless that parents have a
right to know what their child is doing, if a child becomes
pregnant but doesn't feel she can safely speak to her parents
without them simply forcing her to give birth, then the parents'
right [to know] "has gone out the window" because they've had
the time to talk to their daughter about healthy sexual behavior
and birth control options - and create a stable, wholesome
environment within which their daughter could talk to them - but
neglected to do so. If it's gotten to the point that a minor is
already pregnant, then that signifies that there has been
breakdown in communication - either within the home or within
the education system itself.
MS. THOMPSON said that she is strongly against HB 35 and doesn't
feel that it will benefit the young women in Alaska's rural
communities at all. In response to a question, she said she is
aware - both as a young women's self-sufficiency advocate and as
someone raised in the community - of young girls being
impregnated by older, irresponsible men; several of her friends
have been left to be single mothers because their families had a
very, very strong stance against abortion. The older men in
these situations have had no part in their offspring's lives,
and the majority of the young women are now using State social
service funds to raise their children; these young women have
had to let go of their dreams of going to collage or their
dreams of establishing a life outside of Alaska. These young
women love their children but they also have a lot of sadness in
their hearts because they feel as though they have become stuck
and are no longer able to make beneficial choices for themselves
as parents and as community members.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN offered his understanding that physicians
who perform abortions aren't reporting instances in which minors
are being impregnated by older men - men who are committing the
crime of sexual abuse of a minor.
MS. THOMPSON noted that although she herself would not be
affected by HB 35 because she is no longer a minor, she has a
younger sister who would be affected by it. She went on to say:
I'm lucky enough to have grown up in a family where
there is open communication, and at no point in my
life would my parents have said to me, "You got
pregnant, you have to have this baby." ... I do have
friends, however, that were not as fortunate as
myself, and now they are growing up with a child that
they're raising that they don't have the parenting
skills or the life skills to be raising. And no
matter what happens, that child that they're raising
now is being raised with the knowledge that ... [his
conception] was not on purpose - he was not wanted, he
was not asked for, he was brought into this world by
choices that were not his mother's. And I think that
later on we're going to find a group of students in
our schools who are dealing with a lot of depression
issues because they're being raised in homes like
that. And this may be 15 years down the road, when
the [children of these current teenage pregnancies]
... are actually in the school districts, themselves,
and I just don't think any of this is a good plan.
2:46:30 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked Ms. Thompson whether she believes
that if a pregnant minor doesn't have the educational or
financial resources to support a baby that her parents force her
to have, that society is then obligated to provide healthcare,
education, and training that would allow for the young mother to
support her baby. He added, "I, as a legislator, need to know
and to consider that possibility."
MS. THOMPSON said she does believe that if HB 35 is passed into
law and parental consent becomes a requirement for having an
abortion, and a pregnant minor doesn't want to give birth but
her parents won't consent to an abortion, then if the
legislature hasn't taken into account the huge financial support
that young mother-to-be will require as a result of her choice
having been taken away, it would be a huge lapse in judgment [on
the part of the legislature]. She added:
I very much feel that if we are going to force girls
into talking with their parents and getting their
parents' approval to have an abortion, there is going
to be a group of girls who do not want to be mothers
that are forced into it, and they are probably going
to be very angry with their families, and they will
not be able to have the education or career
opportunities that would otherwise have been provided
to them if they had not had a child. Therefore, I
believe that there ... must be the consideration of
the financial responsibility that will fall to the
State to provide for these women and their offspring.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked Ms. Thompson whether she believes
that in the same factual situation, the parents of the pregnant
minor should be required to bear the financial responsibility
for the pregnancy and the raising of the baby.
MS. THOMPSON said no, because in that situation it would be the
legislature mandating that the pregnant minor get parental
consent to obtain an abortion. Such a mandate, she surmised,
would essentially force the parents to make the decision for
their daughter regardless of what she might wish, and those
parents who refuse to grant their daughter an abortion will
simply advise her to obtain public assistance, thus making the
State pay for the raising of that unwanted baby.
2:52:28 PM
KATHLEEN GUSTAFSON, President, Board of Directors, Kachemak Bay
Family Planning Clinic (KBFPC), said that she personally opposes
parental consent laws, and believes that every pregnant Alaskan
has the right to privacy afforded to all Alaskans via the Alaska
State Constitution. She pointed out that a pregnant minor may
need protection from the very people [the sponsor] seeks to
empower with legislation such as HB 35. Surmising that the
sponsor is of the belief that generally parents behave well, she
said she doesn't believe that pregnant minors need to be
protected against generalizations, but instead need to be
protected against specific examples of when the parents aren't
behaving well. To say that generally parents behave well, she
opined, is to simply be looking the other way.
MS. GUSTAFSON then characterized the assertion by some that
those in the healthcare industry are coercing minors into having
abortions as a false perception. Most healthcare providers, she
explained, strictly and scrupulously follow codes of ethics and
mandatory reporting laws. It is outright folly to believe that
what [every] pregnant teenager needs is to be turned over to the
will of her parents, she opined, since doing so [in some
instances] can actually endanger the pregnant teenager.
Furthermore, the exemptions in the bill, she remarked, could
actually harm the very people who need protection the most. She
said she opposes the bill, and encouraged legislators to vote
"no" on HB 35. In conclusion, Ms. Gustafson referred to Planned
Parenthood of Alaska, and she said she agrees that protecting
minors from their own immaturity and aiding parents in
fulfilling their parental responsibilities are compelling state
interests, but opined that [those goals] can only be achieved
via reproductive-health education, not by restricting the rights
of pregnant minors.
2:55:11 PM
MARY JO SPOTTS read her testimony from a letter she'd recently
written to Representative Chenault:
I am opposed to HB 35, and I feel that the legislators
sponsoring it or supporting it are way out of bounds
and are politicizing the abortion debate. The Alaska
Supreme Court ruled in 2007 that the parental consent
Act was unconstitutional. Planned Parenthood states
that in Missouri, second trimester abortions among
minors increased 17 percent after a parental consent
law passed. If legislators are opposed to abortion,
they should push for comprehensive sex education, not
for interfering in private family matters. Most teens
facing an unplanned pregnancy are going to confide in
their parents. The few who don't probably have valid
reasons for not involving their parents. Mandating
parental consent would make a bad situation much
worse. I ask you to oppose HB 35. Thank you.
2:56:48 PM
AUTUMN LEACH, Attorney at Law, after noting that she is a former
legal advocate for victims of domestic violence (DV), sexual
assault, and sexual abuse of a minor crimes, relayed that she
would be testifying in opposition to HB 35. She said:
I am concerned with the inconsistencies of our laws
that this bill brings. I'm also concerned with the
power given to parents to force parenthood upon a
child, a minor. I am also concerned about ... the
financial cost this bill may - and I believe will -
bring to ... [our] state. The inconsistencies of this
law: we allow minors to consent to sexual activity at
age 16 - this law allows a parent to tell a minor, at
age 17 and down, they may consent to sexual activity
but they may not consent to an abortion; our laws
allow minors to obtain birth control and treatment and
testing for [sexually transmitted diseases (STDs)]
without parental consent; our laws also allow minors
to become parents upon their choosing. This law
allows a parent of a minor to force parenthood on ...
[her] - another inconsistency of this law - this law
does not permit a parent of a minor to force abortion
on the minor. I believe the overall purpose of this
bill is to restrict and reduce abortion. ... I'm not
here to have an abortion debate. I don't think anyone
would disagree that limiting abortion is a good thing.
However, limiting the rights of mothers is not a good
thing. I appreciate the discussion, and, again, I
oppose HB 35.
2:59:09 PM
PATRICIA ODDEN said she opposes HB 35. Noting that she is a
mother of seven children - five of them girls - and a
grandmother of three girls, she opined that it is important [for
legislators] to focus on the health of Alaska's teenagers. She
and her daughters are close, she relayed, but acknowledged that
there are probably times when they don't feel comfortable coming
to her, though she would like to think they would come to her if
the situation involved pregnancy. The government, however, has
no place in that relationship. And if the government were to
force any of her children/grandchildren into having a
conversation with her, she said she could see how they would
instead become intimidated and afraid to seek help, to the point
where they would try other, desperate measures. Teenagers are
impulsive and don't always use common sense, especially in
confusing, scary situations.
MS. PATRICIA ODDEN said that she absolutely opposes government
intrusion in her relationships with her five daughters and three
granddaughters. She added:
We do our best as parents, and if, in such a situation
like teen pregnancy, our girls don't feel comfortable
talking with us, I'd like to think that they would
still have access to information to keep them healthy
and safe. We are an Alaska Native family, and we're
very private - there's no place for the government [to
be] forcing itself in a sensitive, family situation.
I oppose this bill. Thank you for hearing me.
3:01:05 PM
CLOVER SIMON, MSW, Vice President, Alaska, Planned Parenthood of
the Great Northwest (PPGNW), relayed that PPGNW is opposed to
HB 35 for a couple of reasons. One, parents and teenagers
already are communicating about the difficult issue of abortion,
and, two, PPGNW believes that HB 35 is unconstitutional as
referenced in the 2007 Alaska Supreme Court decision in State v.
Planned Parenthood of Alaska. What PPGNW is seeing in its
clinics is that parents are involved in their daughters'
decisions when they are dealing with the very difficult issue of
unintended pregnancy. Furthermore, PPGNW supports and
encourages parental involvement in all of the services it
provides to teenagers, and with regard to the issue of abortion,
PPGNW is seeing that parents are overwhelmingly aware and
involved in the process.
MS. SIMON said that historically, Planned Parenthood's Anchorage
clinic has seen two or fewer young women [per year] obtaining
abortion services without parental involvement. In 2008, [that
clinic] served 18 young women; all but two were 16 years old and
all but four had parents involved. Furthermore, she relayed,
when she questioned other physicians in the community, they
stated that the majority of their teenage clients accessing
abortion services have involved their parents. Noting that
during the discussion on HB 35, a lot of people, including the
sponsor, have spoken about the rights of parents, and about
their view that the Alaska Supreme Court ruling has driven a
wedge between parents and teenagers, she pointed out that in
actuality, teenagers and their parents are talking about sex and
unintended pregnancies - their parents are very actively
involved. Therefore, she opined, although there appears to be a
reluctance among legislators to make laws based on exceptions
and rare circumstances, that's exactly what is occurring via
HB 35. Young women are not streaming into clinics flippantly
deciding to terminate a pregnancy.
MS. SIMON also opined that the judicial bypass procedure
outlined in HB 35 will not protect young women from those who've
been characterized by the sponsor as bad-acting parents; the
bill does not include a provision mandating that information
about a minor seeking judicial bypass be kept confidential, nor
does it include a mechanism for supporting the minor during the
judicial bypass process. Under the bill's judicial bypass
procedure, for example, a minor, if she went through the court
system, wouldn't have to tell her parents that she's seeking an
abortion, but the bill allows [physicians and the court system]
to share that information with her school. This doesn't make
any sense. A young woman in a small community has little option
but to take matters into her own hands, and this could lead to
unsafe home abortions. The bill also establishes a mandatory
48-hour waiting period for teenagers seeking an abortion, even
teenagers that have parental consent, and this will place an
additional burden on those teenagers who have to travel to seek
an abortion.
MS. SIMON, in conclusion, reiterated her belief that HB 35 is
unconstitutional and that its judicial bypass procedure does
nothing to protect an already vulnerable young woman.
3:04:29 PM
KATHERINE FOREST relayed that she was born and raised in
Anchorage in a family with very strong Catholic views, learned
in a Baptist school the importance of the Jesuit family, and is
now the mother of a 4-year-old daughter who is the center of her
life. "That is why I oppose HB 35," she remarked, because she
wants her daughter to feel safe, and she intends to maintain
open communication with her daughter so that she will feel that
she can always come to her. However, if her daughter doesn't
feel that she can come to her, Ms. Forest added, she wants to
know that her daughter has access to safe medical care; "I do
not want her to have to navigate a horrible process [in order]
to get the care she needs."
MS. FOREST relayed that as a teenager, she was taught to trust
and confide in her parents; her relationship with them was based
on communication and love, both of which are very important in a
teenager's life and are healthy for both sides. She relayed
that she was also taught, at an early age, to be responsible,
and so, throughout her years, this responsibility has made her
who she is. These are the things that she wants to reinforce
with her daughter, and why she works hard, and why she seeks to
find the best care possible for her daughter while she is at
work, she said, and why she strives to participate in healthy
activities with her daughter; "I am sharing the same gifts that
... [were] given to me as a young adult."
MS. FOREST explained that when she graduated from high school,
her parents - knowing that she was a mature, young adult capable
of taking care of herself because those attributes were fostered
throughout her upbringing - entrusted her with traveling to
South America for four months, and during her travels, she
learned that life in other parts of the world was very different
than her life at home; this was a very eye-opening experience.
As an adult, she relayed, she has had the opportunity to work
closely with Anchorage's underprivileged and at-risk youth, and
she is therefore very aware that many youth haven't had the
option of having parents that they can trust, confide in, or
even talk to at all. House Bill 35 will affect Alaska's
underprivileged youth, youth who have been denied an upbringing
filled with family values through no fault of their own; such an
upbringing was never offered to them, and their parents never
shared a loving, nourishing relationship with them - thus they
don't have the experience of such a relationship/upbringing to
take away with them.
MS. FOREST said that Alaskans do not need their youth to feel
frightened or terrorized, or to act as if the world is going to
close in on them, or to resort to more drastic solutions -
including taking their own lives. "We need to help Alaska's
youth, and House Bill 35 is not the way to go; we need to help
and protect our teens in Alaska, for they are our future," she
concluded.
3:07:00 PM
TIANA ODDEN relayed that she is 19 years old, that she had an
abortion about five/six months ago, and that she can't imagine
being two years younger than she is now and being forced to ask
her parents for permission to do something which she feels that
she must make her own decision about.
3:07:35 PM
DEBRA CALDERA, Alaska Public Health Association (ALPHA), after
noting that she is also the past president of the ALPHA and that
one of the ALPHA's goals is to promote the public health,
relayed that the 160 members of the ALPHA oppose HB 35. The
ALPHA, like its parent organization [the American Public Health
Association (APHA)], believes in the Alaska Supreme Court and
U.S. Supreme Court rulings regarding the right of a woman to
decide for herself issues concerning her reproductive health -
the right of all women of all ages, in particular teenagers.
During a crises pregnancy, regardless of a woman's age, all
barriers must be removed to ensure that the woman, and teenagers
in particular, feel free to access health and reproductive
services. Requiring parental or judicial consent for a teenager
to obtain an abortion will, in some instances, place
insurmountable barriers to care; these barriers can threaten her
health and her safety. Ms. Caldera concluded by stating that
the ALPHA is strongly opposed to HB 35.
3:08:50 PM
JULIE BARRY said she opposes HB 35, mentioning that her mother,
who accompanied her to the committee hearing today, also
supports her views. Ms. Barry relayed that she is currently
pregnant, and thus issues pertaining to pregnancy are of
particular interest to her. She noted that previous arguments
have already been made that HB 35 will erect barriers to women
in rural areas; will endanger - physically, emotionally, and
economically - teenagers who come from abusive families; and
will erect barriers to those abused teenagers. She pointed out
that families often have less overt problems, problems which
nonetheless pose significant challenges for Alaska's young
women. And even when not abusive, some parents may just not
have their daughter's best interest at heart; for example some
parents of a pregnant teenager may desire the economic support
that another PFD check or additional public assistance checks
could provide.
MS. BARRY recounted that she knows of a girl whose mother rented
a room to a man, that man had sex with the girl, the girl got
pregnant, and the mother refused to give permission for her to
get an abortion because she feared that the man would move out
of the house and she would then lose an important source of
income, whereas by making her daughter have the baby, it would
result in a permanent source of income. This sort of influence
from parents, Ms. Barry surmised, is not uncommon, though it is
certainly inappropriate, she opined, when a young woman is
considering whether or not to have a baby - it should instead be
her own decision. She said she finds it troubling that
arguments regarding abortion itself are being raised; instead,
what should be considered is the issue of parental involvement,
because she does agree with some of the bill's intentions: that
it could provide vulnerable teenagers with increased support,
that it does allow for family involvement. Unfortunately, the
bill assumes that families will be supportive and assumes that
families will keep their daughter's best interests in mind,
because although such is usually the case, it isn't always.
MS. BARRY offered her understanding that other states which have
enacted parental consent laws have seen increases in the number
of abortions. So although some people support HB 35 in the
hopes that it will decrease the number of abortions - a concept
with which, she remarked, she agrees - she thinks that they are
misguided, and that such hopes are therefore a misguided reason
to support the bill. In conclusion, she offered her belief that
providing comprehensive sexual education would instead be the
best way to decrease the number unintended pregnancies and hence
the number of abortions, adding that she thinks the
legislature's time would be better spent on that effort.
3:12:37 PM
MONIQUE KARAGANIS, M.D., Pediatrics, said that one of the most
important aspects of being a pediatrician is being an advocate
for the teenagers she's had the privilege to care for. Dr.
Karaganis referred to Ms. Tiana Odden's testimony, and opined
that it's important that someone speak and advocate for those
people who are unable to vote because they are still underage.
Dr. Karaganis pointed out that there are also other instances in
which a teenager could be reluctant to talk with his/her
parents, such as if he/she had an STD and was seeking treatment,
or had a substance abuse problem and was seeking treatment, or
was homosexual but unsure about when to disclose that fact.
Teenagers, she surmised, inherently know their own situation
better than this legislative body could, and so therefore are
able to make a better decision about when and where it is
emotionally, psychologically, and physically safe to reveal
intimate aspects of their lives to their parents.
DR. KARAGANIS opined that the bill's attempt at mandating such
revelations to parents puts teenagers at risk in multiple ways.
For example, when other states have enacted parental consent or
parental notification laws, it's resulted in an increase in
late-term abortions, which are inherently medically riskier. To
believe that HB 35 would in any way discourage teenage
pregnancy, she surmised, assumes that the teenage brain is
developed enough to think three or four steps ahead, [and since
that's not the case], HB 35 won't succeed in discouraging either
the number of teenage pregnancies that occur or the number of
abortions that then result. The bill will, however, increase
physical, emotional, and psychological risks to teenage girls.
For this reason, as an advocate for teenagers, she feels she
must speak for them on this issue.
DR. KARAGANIS asked members to consider the reverse situation:
if a pregnant minor didn't want to have an abortion, but there
was a statutory requirement that her parents be notified and
that she obtain their consent in order to give birth, would
legislators then be advocating for the parents' right to stop
their daughter from giving birth? She surmised that legislators
would not, and that HB 35, therefore, represents an attempt at
forcing motherhood on teenage girls who aren't ready for such a
responsibility. Statistics regarding what happens to the
children of teenage mothers suggest that when a young woman
doesn't feel ready to be a parent, she should be supported in
that decision, Dr. Karaganis concluded.
[Chair Ramras turned the gavel over to Vice Chair Dahlstrom.]
3:16:12 PM
BRYN WINTERBERGER indicated that although there might be room
for improvement, she currently has pretty good communication
with her parents, and relayed that because she has taken sexual
education classes that were taught by her father, she feels
comfortable speaking to her parents about such matters, whereas
most of her friends would not even consider discussing such
things with their parents and furthermore aren't as well
informed as she is. And she, herself, she added, would be
uncomfortable talking to her parents about so serious an issue
as an unwanted pregnancy, because she wouldn't know how they
would react; for example, if she thought they would react
negatively, she would be rather hesitant to raise the issue with
them. Again, she said, she has several friends who just don't
have good communication with their parents, particularly about
such serious issues as becoming pregnant or wanting an abortion,
and since that's the case currently, that's unlikely to be
changed merely by the enactment of HB 35.
[Vice Chair Dahlstrom returned the gavel to Chair Ramras.]
3:19:07 PM
KEN WINTERBERGER, after noting that he is the father of two
daughters, said that he opposes HB 35. Mandated parental
consent and notification might put more Alaska teenagers at risk
than are already at risk. Parents should indeed want to be
involved in their teenager's lives, and he and his wife do want
their daughters to come to them if they become pregnant, and
seriously hope that they would do so; however, in reality, a law
such as HB 35 doesn't work, and he can't envision how any law
can mandate family communication, he remarked. There are too
many families in which the kind of communication being mandated
by HB 35 could in fact be dangerous, and teenagers who are
forced to do something that is frightening tend to make
desperate decisions.
MR. WINTERBERGER said that such teenagers may wait too long
before speaking to anyone and thereby delay obtaining any
medical services, or they may research the Internet for ways to
abort on their own. If the State is really interested in
mandating family communication regarding sexuality and the
unintended outcomes of sexual activity, then the State should
really put more efforts into providing comprehensive sexual
education, which, he relayed, he has spent almost 10 years
teaching at his church; the comprehensive sexual education he
teaches emphasizes communication. He too noted that in states
which have enacted parental consent laws, the number of late-
term abortions obtained by teenagers has increased.
Furthermore, even in states that limit access to legal abortion
and make obtaining an abortion intimidating or complicated - as
HB 35 proposes to do in Alaska - women still get abortions.
MR. WINTERBERGER, in conclusion, expressed concern over what he
characterized as the politicizing of abortion at the expense of
the health and safety of Alaska's teenagers, and stated that he
didn't think that that's good policy.
3:21:39 PM
MARGARET GADSDEN urged the committee to vote against HB 35,
characterizing it as a safety issue. To pass a law that
requires communication among families would only endanger the
lives of young women. Not all young women live in households
wherein it's safe for them to share information about an
unwanted pregnancy with their parents, but they still deserve to
have access to affordable, safe healthcare. She opined that the
legislature should never enact legislation that would jeopardize
an individual's right to healthcare, and yet that's just what
HB 35 would do. She said that in her job as a high school
counselor, she's spoken to many teenage girls about pregnancy,
and therefore she thinks that the best thing to do as a state to
help improve the lives of all Alaskans would be to institute
comprehensive, medically-accurate, age-appropriate sex education
in Alaska's public schools. The lack of information available
to young people is astonishing; consider, for example, that
according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC), the rate of teenage pregnancy in Alaska since 2006 has
increased 19 percent, and that there is still a high rate of
STDs among Alaska's teenagers. This illustrates that what is
really needed is education, not legislation that will limit
young people's access to health care and information.
[HB 35 was held over.]
3:23:46 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 3:23 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| Bellotti v. Baird.pdf |
HJUD 3/9/2009 1:00:00 PM HJUD 3/11/2009 1:00:00 PM HJUD 3/13/2009 1:00:00 PM |
|
| Court Forms re Judicial Bypass.pdf |
HJUD 3/9/2009 1:00:00 PM HJUD 3/11/2009 1:00:00 PM HJUD 3/13/2009 1:00:00 PM |
|
| State v. Planned Parenthood.pdf |
HJUD 3/9/2009 1:00:00 PM HJUD 3/11/2009 1:00:00 PM HJUD 3/13/2009 1:00:00 PM |
|
| Letters of SupportOpposition 2.pdf |
HJUD 3/9/2009 1:00:00 PM HJUD 3/11/2009 1:00:00 PM HJUD 3/13/2009 1:00:00 PM |
|
| Letters of SupportOpposition 1.pdf |
HJUD 3/9/2009 1:00:00 PM HJUD 3/11/2009 1:00:00 PM HJUD 3/13/2009 1:00:00 PM |
|
| HB35 Sectional.pdf |
HJUD 3/9/2009 1:00:00 PM HJUD 3/11/2009 1:00:00 PM HJUD 3/13/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 35 |
| HB35 version A.pdf |
HJUD 3/9/2009 1:00:00 PM HJUD 3/11/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 35 |
| HB35 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HJUD 3/9/2009 1:00:00 PM HJUD 3/11/2009 1:00:00 PM HJUD 3/13/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 35 |
| Support.pdf |
HJUD 3/9/2009 1:00:00 PM |
|
| HB35-LAW-CIV-3-6-09 (2).pdf |
HJUD 3/9/2009 1:00:00 PM HJUD 3/11/2009 1:00:00 PM HJUD 3/13/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 35 |
| HB35-DHSS-MS-03-09-09.pdf |
HJUD 3/9/2009 1:00:00 PM HJUD 3/11/2009 1:00:00 PM HJUD 3/13/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 35 |
| Letters of SupportOpposition 3.pdf |
HJUD 3/9/2009 1:00:00 PM HJUD 3/11/2009 1:00:00 PM HJUD 3/13/2009 1:00:00 PM |