Senate panel sends parental-rights clarification bill to amendment stage after parent raises concerns

Senate Bill 11-99, a sponsor-led effort to clarify the Parental Rights Act, was sent to the amending order Thursday after Senator Kelly Anthony asked the Senate State Affairs Committee for further fine-tuning.

Senator Kelly Anthony, R., District 27, told the committee the bill is intended to clarify portions of last year’s parental-rights law that some people misinterpreted and to add provisions such as a statute of limitations and guidance on how the law applies when a minor child is also a parent. “As the law was enacted, there was, in some corners of the state, confusion. And so this bill is meant to clarify those questions as to what the act actually did,” Anthony said.

The bill drew one virtual public commenter, who urged the committee to hold the bill rather than advance it. Nicole Bridal, identifying herself as a parent in District 11, said language on page 3 that expands the definition of “minor child” to include someone who is pregnant or already has a child is problematic. “This is basically saying a 13 year old who happened to get pregnant…would no longer be considered a minor child throughout this process,” Bridal said, adding concerns about how medical bills would be paid if parents were not notified.

Anthony responded that the draft addresses decision-making authority for health matters and is not about who pays medical bills. “This law…will have nothing to do with who pays for what. It’s just a decision-making piece as to who makes decisions with regard to a child in health care matters,” Anthony said, and agreed the language could be refined in the amending order.

Senator Adams moved that the committee send the bill to the fourteenth order for possible amendment; Senator Rucki seconded. The committee approved the motion by voice vote.

The amending order will allow sponsors and stakeholders to refine the language in the bill before it is returned for a committee vote. No final policy change was adopted by the committee during Thursday’s meeting; the bill’s proponents and opponents said they expect additional drafting and review in the amending process.

Votes at this hearing were procedural and limited to whether the bill should move to the amending order; no final passage vote on the bill itself occurred in committee.