Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Father Engagement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House health committee advances bill directing Health Dept. to run fatherhood engagement campaign
Summary
The Pennsylvania House Health Committee voted to report House Bill 12 12 as amended, directing the Department of Health to develop a public awareness campaign and provider guidance on fatherhood engagement; the bill’s timetable and funding language were narrowed in an amendment.
Get email alerts on the Father Engagement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Pennsylvania House Health Committee on a voice and roll call vote reported House Bill 12 12 as amended, a measure directing the Department of Health to develop a public awareness campaign and provider guidance on the benefits of father engagement for maternal and child health.
The bill, sponsored by Representative Anthony Abney, directs the Department of Health to produce two components: a public awareness campaign (developed within two years under the bill’s text) and guidance for maternity-care providers (to be developed and posted within one year). The amendment offered by Representative Khan removed insurers from the directive, added flexibility for campaign materials, shortened the required external report from six to four years and made implementation subject to available funding.
“...this is legislation that was modeled off of federal legislation... a bipartisan effort... to engage more fathers to be more participatory in the pre‑pregnancy, pregnancy and post‑pregnancy process,” Representative Anthony Abney said in committee remarks about the bill’s goals.
Supporters said the measure signals state attention to fathers’ roles in prenatal and postpartum care. Representative Chair Rapp said the amendment “streamline[d] the bill” and expressed support for reducing timelines while noting some policy concerns about fatherhood recognition in other areas of law. Representative Khan, who summarized the amendment, said removing insurers reflected jurisdictional limits of the Department of Health and added a funding contingency.
Opponents or cautious members raised timing and measurability questions. Representative Hoyt asked whether the two‑year timeline for the public campaign was excessive; committee staff answered that two years allowed time to meet detailed content requirements, though materials could be completed earlier. Representative Walsh asked how outcomes would be measured; Representative Abney and Representative Khan replied that the joint state government commission’s report and selected metrics (for example, screening rates for paternal depression and participation in prenatal visits) would provide measurable data points.
On the amendment (A01100), the roll call showed 24 yeas and 2 not voting; the committee later reported the bill as amended (final committee vote recorded as 24 yeas, 2 nays). The committee message attached the amendment’s changes: removal of insurers from the Department of Health directive, shortened reporting interval, flexibility on provider materials, and subjecting implementation to available funding.
The legislation also asks the Joint State Government Commission to study implementation and report to legislative chairs within four years of passage as written in the amendment.
The committee forwarded the bill to the full House as amended; no enactment date was set in committee.

