House bill 662 would require showing abortion‑procedure videos in high school health classes

Rep. John Sellers, sponsor of House Bill 662, told the House Education Policy and Administration Committee the bill would require health education in public high schools (grades 9–12) to include specified videos showing abortion procedures and explanations about different methods.

Sellers said the videos he distributed to committee members are “educational, medically accurate, comprehensive, and age appropriate,” and argued the material helps students make informed decisions. “Our schools are not providing our kids this information,” he told the committee. He also said parents may still opt out under current law.

Committee members pressed Sellers on several aspects. Representative Hall asked whether mandating videos removes local control over curriculum; Sellers replied the intent is consistency so topics are not missed because of schedule disruptions. Representative Cornell asked about a provision that would give the attorney general standing to sue to enforce the section; Sellers acknowledged the language could allow complaints from residents who do not have children in school and said he was not an attorney. Representative Freeman and others asked whether the state already requires health education and whether the materials are evidence‑based; Sellers said health education is required but that he introduced the videos as a starting point and was open to other materials.

Witnesses who testified for the bill included Kurt Wolper (chairman, New Hampshire Right to Life), who said showing ultrasound or similar materials changes decisions and would “save babies’ lives,” and other witnesses who described personal or faith‑based reasons for supporting the requirement. Opponents included Jerry Frew (associate executive director, New Hampshire School Administrators Association), Becky Wilson (New Hampshire School Boards Association) and Jerry Frew and others who said the bill is too prescriptive, risks eroding local curriculum control, and might not reflect the State Board of Education’s recently revised health‑education standards (the transcript references the “306 rules”). NHSAA and NHSBA witnesses recommended retention so districts, teachers and health educators could advise on appropriate materials and ages.

Committee members also questioned age appropriateness (Representative Hall asked whether videos are suitable for students entering 9th grade), the frequency requirement (Sellers said his intent was the videos be shown annually to grades 9–12 but he would accept amending to once during those four years), and fiscal impacts (representatives asked about fiscal notes tied to university and community college certification cited during the HB 667 discussion).

The hearing record shows substantive debate about these topics, including concerns about how the attorney‑general enforcement language could work in practice and whether the State Board’s learning standards already cover the topics the bill targets.

The committee did not record a final vote during the hearing. Further work‑session drafting between the sponsor and education stakeholders was discussed.