[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6592281,"mediaKeyId","2899612-ef84ac6f1c3fd832b227aa02947dc9fe","parentId",2899612,"title","Long hearing on parental‑rights bill: sponsors say it restores trust; opponents say it risks outing vulnerable students","audioSeconds",3184,"startMs",12254000,"endMs",15438000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2899612-ef84ac6f1c3fd832b227aa02947dc9fe&start=12254&end=15438","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2899612-ef84ac6f1c3fd832b227aa02947dc9fe/thumbnail_12254000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6592281/New-Hampshire/Long-hearing-on-parentalrights-bill-sponsors-say-it-restores-trust-opponents-say-it-risks-outing-vulnerable-students","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6592281-4b248dc09a58272f9ee2ca1972ba98f9/orig.mp4?Expires=1771155831&Signature=Gk6iMuUWJPNzrYt6qocqtv2WuD-Dotz0GAV0jBXPcAFgII2EE-oQhjoRaJyAPvYUXlHs7xhKAzsTaLNxVY0u5Mvvmia4Wx3sKOB5JQ6OMQ-tQioXZM22GxaqMMDIHkv7soRcQ3~DWZGd7JTCYFPjM77GS29IHMPi0L0ReV8mMANkZKKCLDAbIzv08Rw3XPSiBkQhFoqw9jhyzdQtpid-u-KTTB~OsR7LJWtZ8jNGy8WoZFwHxp49p8PA~HBTx~fJufiKqjaBR6P7zRpomKH3EbDym3a35yd2xbkyPRsfFwkwL4pn0CooO4-o7g90a6EgCp9HR~WXlkD6ogSRrXYloA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","New Hampshire Legislature","date","2025-04-08T18:30:39.84Z","article","The House Children and Family Law Committee heard extensive testimony on Senate Bill 72, a proposed parental‑rights statute that would require public schools to notify parents annually of enumerated rights and impose a process schools must follow before withholding information from parents.

Senator Tim Lang, the bill’s sponsor, said the measure is intended to restore trust between parents and schools: “the primary, the beginning of all of this starts with the parent trusting the school system,” he told the committee. The bill lists specific parental rights and creates a procedure for school officials who believe a “compelling state interest” justifies withholding information from a parent; the bill would require clear‑and‑convincing justification before records or information could be withheld.

Opponents said the bill could force schools to disclose sensitive information that could place students at risk. David Trummell of Ware told the committee the New Hampshire Supreme Court in Doe v. Manchester (Aug. 30, 2024) found parental rights in school settings are not unqualified and said schools can, in some circumstances, withhold information in the child’s interest. \"This bill is going too far,\" Trummell said, adding that mandatory disclosure “is gonna make a school a place where children won't want to have those conversations with trusted adults because they're afraid they will have to tell their parents everything they hear.”

Multiple committee members and witnesses debated competing concerns: whether the statutory standard for withholding (clear and convincing evidence of a compelling state interest) was appropriate, how the measure would interact with mandated‑reporting obligations for suspected abuse or neglect, and whether the statute would remove discretion schools need when students seek guidance.

Sponsor Lang and supporters argued the bill does not displace mandatory reporters or criminal investigations and that it simply requires a written, documented process and higher evidentiary threshold before a school withholds information from a parent. Several lawmakers and witnesses raised scenarios — including a student telling a teacher the student is gay and asking the teacher not to tell a parent — and debated whether the bill would expose children to harm in those scenarios.

Opponents urged the committee to preserve the ability of schools to exercise professional judgment and to avoid a one‑size‑fits‑all mandate that could produce forced disclosures leading to children being homeless or at risk. Multiple witnesses urged caution and recommended narrower language or additional guardrails; committee members asked staff to draft clarifying edits.

The committee debated an amendment during the hearing and agreed to continue work on technical language; transcript shows the committee intended further review and possible amendment before final action.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Children and Family Law (04/08/2025)","oneSentenceSummary","A proposed parental‑rights statute prompted a lengthy committee hearing. Sponsor Sen. Tim Lang said the law would restore parents’ trust in schools and require annual notice of parental rights; opponents warned the measure could force schools to disclose sensitive information and endanger some students.","taxTitle","Children and Family Law, House of Representatives, Committees\t, Legislative, New Hampshire","taxId",17742,"location","New Hampshire","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6592285,"Committee hears technical fixes to out‑of‑state residential‑placement rules for children",897,3587000,4484000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2899612-ef84ac6f1c3fd832b227aa02947dc9fe&start=3587&end=4484","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2899612-ef84ac6f1c3fd832b227aa02947dc9fe/thumbnail_3587000.jpg","/articles/6592285/New-Hampshire/Committee-hears-technical-fixes-to-outofstate-residentialplacement-rules-for-children","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6592285-bdc56c630ae2b9d94a119a8e28e4f5fc/orig.mp4?Expires=1771155831&Signature=dECNiLzW7lZrrEWdTF7AYtwqNDr6eGttW~ZhsDIyYFKEj4S0jG89Kqo22T~pblHXSe-qJ0mCc59wsLthggCYjRTPLGQJcIbouAg0ZJjtSQpquHhKnNLDr2UrNEkJb40qkXTDiGQkO4mmBicplj~arA5IrhQoAmYB4N5T48qiUvfzMLG4gVJuTJWaBTROB37rND6Op6p4oTr5dQXJeLujxYur4GQNa1v-auUBX-eW9RIpHpY-JwYw58~V0tWB1M-9BO~GV87ELApH71FUSgBN3Ka7JHUy2ZsScVXZpUzwf6NUd6KorBTEo-6l28Nev6O6Ey8~tqK7f7atvJaO3nuaJA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate Bill 161 returned to the House Children and Family Law Committee as a technical “replace‑all” bill intended to correct drafting inconsistencies that resulted from last session’s merger of two laws expanding oversight of residential treatment placements.

Sen. Regina Birdsall (District 19) introduced SB 161 as a remedial measure requested by the Department of Health and Human Services. Susan Larrabee, general counsel and legislative liaison for DHHS’s Division for Children, Youth, and Families (DCYF), told the committee the bill replaces two inadvertently unchanged sections so terminology is consistent across the statutes and corrects a cross‑reference error.

Larrabee described how prior enactments required placements to be licensed by the state where the facility operates and certified by the DHHS unit that oversees children’s behavioral‑health placements. She said DCYF and stakeholders already implemented new procedures, including a visitation form for monthly caseworker visits, trainings, and updated administrative rules; SB 161 would make two sections of statute consistent with that work.

Betty Gay (House Alumni Association) asked whether the bill’s language explicitly meant certification by the New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services; Larrabee confirmed the bill uses “department” as shorthand and DCYF treats that to mean the New Hampshire department, consistent with other statutory definitions in RSA 169‑C.

Attorney Lisa Wolford (Children’s Law Center) and Office of the Child Advocate representatives supported the correction as a clean‑up that aligns the law with the implementation already underway, and invited the committee to consider a small wording clarification to avoid any suggestion that judicial oversight of placements applies only to out‑of‑state placements.

Witnesses and committee members agreed to draft a short clarifying amendment before final action; no fiscal impact was reported in committee research.

The hearing record shows the committee discussed a replace‑all amendment (15‑39 H) to fix the two inconsistent subsections and correct a Scribner’s error. Larrabee said the corrections harmonize language about licensing in the facility’s home state and New Hampshire certification.","DHHS and the Office of the Child Advocate described a replace‑all amendment to correct drafting inconsistencies in a prior law governing residential treatment placements and certification of out‑of‑state programs.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6592289,"Committee advances bill to expand felony options for severe child endangerment after debate over vagueness and intent standard",3618,1307000,4925000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2899612-ef84ac6f1c3fd832b227aa02947dc9fe&start=1307&end=4925","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2899612-ef84ac6f1c3fd832b227aa02947dc9fe/thumbnail_1307000.jpg","/articles/6592289/New-Hampshire/Committee-advances-bill-to-expand-felony-options-for-severe-child-endangerment-after-debate-over-vagueness-and-intent-standard","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6592289-d7ad08b3049e773dea689aeadd81a4e2/orig.mp4?Expires=1771155831&Signature=kbFzfa7nGhQAn5GEz-ML6dK-T3zTSIP9Nb37cU6Zs2JecTYykNTwQKHzBEQcbUSDMGUNeNZ1PI~8hJjQxh0KLxbAZGKJEX0w12P2iGyj-Iy7IDxA2cfxQjMIhCvtbktIA~L2dOOCsnSFhAmXLckeWv9eddV1ezrWJ38ttLTAovpGWYSJpxshK65BAX0t~l~MMB9x1FMQGzZk1f1Aa7gXdNu~mItfFqiD-qU5ghMwCjtR-mng6J3~mleDf00~iyZjbcAAMfqQKDA2vrWnDwjenp16cv0Nleth5ZI9kUN5HUbChb6GypTKW67ExuNx3B0caACDY1W4D~SsxLGorJB1Zw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House Children and Family Law Committee advanced Senate Bill 23 after a day of testimony that split law‑enforcement and child‑protection advocates from some parents and executive‑branch officials over how broadly to define endangering the welfare of a child.

Senator Pat Long, the bill’s prime sponsor, said the measure would “expand what constitutes endangering the welfare of a child by adding additional violative conduct,” arguing the change would give prosecutors and judges tools to address the most egregious cases that now may be treated only as misdemeanors.

Manchester Police witnesses and Nashua—identified in testimony as “Nashville” in the transcript—urged passage with graphic examples. Detective‑sergeant Ryan Runyon outlined cases his department had investigated, including an 11‑year‑old who ingested fentanyl and a six‑year‑old left outside for 36 minutes in cold weather; Runyon testified those matters resulted only in misdemeanor endangerment charges under the existing statute.

Nicholas Georgoulis, identified in testimony as a Manchester officer with juvenile and domestic units, said the bill “is designed to delineate between what we already deal with… and some of the most egregious cases,” and stressed the statute still requires a mens rea of knowingly in other subsections. He said the measure would allow prosecutors to pursue felony charges in severe cases such as prolonged squalor or sustained neglect.

Executive Counselor Dave Wheeler of the Governor’s council testified in opposition and warned the bill’s language is vague. He described a Manchester case in which a woman was arrested after police concluded that a gun in a glove compartment with children in the car amounted to endangerment; charges were later dropped, he said, and he warned the proposed language could lead to unintended consequences and “disaster” if not tightened.

Several witnesses, including the Office of the Child Advocate and the Children’s Law Center, supported SB 23 as narrowly tailored and said current statutory language can leave prosecutors and courts without appropriate felony options in the most serious cases. Lisa Macio of the Office of the Child Advocate told the committee that courts and prosecutors “are often finding their hands tied” and that felony options in other states are a model for New Hampshire.

Opponents, including Donald Gilbert and public commenters, urged retaining the term “purposely” and narrowing language to avoid penalizing parents for accidents or to avoid excess prosecutorial discretion. Several lawmakers questioned removing the higher intent word; sponsors and law‑enforcement witnesses said the statute already includes the mens rea of knowingly and that would remain in place.

After deliberation in executive session, the committee voted to recommend SB 23 “ought to pass.” The recorded committee motion was moved by Representative Greg and seconded by Representative DeSimone; the roll call recorded 15 yes, 0 no.

Committee discussion focused on: the difference between “knowingly” and “purposely,” the bill’s intended reach (egregious squalor, repeated conduct, and incidents producing or risking serious bodily injury), and the concern that broadly worded statutes could be applied in unintended ways without clarifying definitions or guardrails.

The bill’s supporters said the measure would give prosecutors a felony option used in other states for cases involving severe, prolonged neglect; opponents asked the committee to narrow or clarify the language, add examples, or require additional definitional precision before the bill moved to the full House.","Law enforcement and child‑advocacy witnesses urged the committee to give prosecutors a felony option for repeated or extreme child‑endangering conduct; critics warned the bill’s language is vague and could criminalize well‑meaning parents. The committee ultimately recommended the bill 'ought to pass.'",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6592294,"Committee hears bill to give DHHS fuller access to applicants’ criminal records for childcare licensing",839,413000,1252000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2899612-ef84ac6f1c3fd832b227aa02947dc9fe&start=413&end=1252","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2899612-ef84ac6f1c3fd832b227aa02947dc9fe/thumbnail_413000.jpg","/articles/6592294/New-Hampshire/Committee-hears-bill-to-give-DHHS-fuller-access-to-applicants-criminal-records-for-childcare-licensing","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6592294-eeb6b6b5937b896f33526449d0dc6ab4/orig.mp4?Expires=1771155831&Signature=NpXi6PHJZl9tDl1Sn8a9BGKzet0RAa9f0mLJGnzOKsA33beqItrcpKSwXEgoCkSg8d86Hqjt7serbmWsQWFVS51-rQxkWScVHSsSvtoK9kaQisYlcAJbiW~IQOcW6MxdtD3MaYQ9cd8enUtqYWqJWe~cCfZ6DF0BmDqBzvObFCyyaohzjzIpPqLBr9gw2vIqriCTq5S0AhLbR-zu599aAU7jk~ha4F~N669Tmry4OOuBg6Hk1Ev0H0nyf1k6w2cK~Lcv7GYFMEJIPPE~wbqVvBY~~hkz2g5J5J3egBzHw81KLgg4qqfQFu2gZrw~g1ET~xf5Za29USYMPWRg~wjgzg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House Children and Family Law Committee heard testimony on Senate Bill 22 on behalf of the bill’s prime sponsor, Sen. John Pearl, with an agency request that would let the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) receive fuller criminal‑history information when licensing child‑care workers.

Melissa Clement, chief of DHHS’s Childcare Licensing Unit, told the committee, “the bill will close the gap so that [the] childcare licensing unit receives full information regarding an individual's criminal record, including criminal charges.” Clement said the department requested the change after identifying cases in which charges were not visible to licensing staff because the system currently only returned records after convictions.

Christine Shea, administrator of the State Police Criminal Records Unit, said the bill would allow the unit to release a full FBI record to DHHS. “We would be able to release the confidential record that is a claim of that a bad act versus a conviction of a bad act,” Shea testified, adding that the unit cannot release juvenile records in New Hampshire.

Committee members asked how the bill interacts with existing federal and state rules. Clement said the five‑year language that some members cited comes from federal Office of Child Care requirements and could not be changed through this bill. Shea and Clement also explained practical limits: an FBI check is a snapshot in time and will not automatically update the department if a pending charge is later dismissed or results in a conviction; a fresh fingerprint submission would be required for any later update.

Representatives pressed on scope. Clement confirmed the bill covers both day‑care programs and residential childcare programs, and Shea confirmed that certain confidential records — such as out‑of‑state cases that were dismissed or no‑prossed — would be visible under the bill’s language, while juvenile records would not be released.

No formal committee vote on SB 22 was recorded in the transcript. The hearing closed after agency witnesses answered questions about process and statutory limits.

The committee’s follow‑up questions focused on implementation details: how often fingerprints are resubmitted (Clement said background checks are done every five years, with interim checks if new information is reported), the limitations on releasing juvenile records, and the practical effect of FBI “snapshot” responses.

An agency representative from DHHS told the committee the change is intended to align childcare licensing checks with the Department of Education system already used for school staff and to give licensing staff the information they need to act when an applicant has pending charges that might bar employment in child‑care settings.","A bill that would let the Department of Health and Human Services receive full FBI criminal-history records, including non‑adjudicated charges, drew agency testimony and questions about limits such as juvenile records and the timing of FBI “snapshots.”","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Long hearing on parental‑rights bill: sponsors say it restores trust; opponents say it risks outing vulnerable students

Committee hears technical fixes to out‑of‑state residential‑placement rules for children

Committee advances bill to expand felony options for severe child endangerment after debate over vagueness and intent standard

Committee hears bill to give DHHS fuller access to applicants’ criminal records for childcare licensing