Senate advances bill widening endangerment statute to cover certain treatments for under-16s

Senate Bill 164, a measure introduced by Senator Fuller to amend the state's child endangerment statute, advanced on second reading in the Committee of the Whole by a 30-20 vote.

The bill would add to Section 45-5-6622 provisions that make it an offense for a person to "knowingly procure or provide" specified medical or surgical treatments on a child younger than 16 for the purpose of altering appearance or affirming a child's perception when that appearance or perception is inconsistent with the child's biological characteristics. Senator Fuller said the amendment "is an act revising the offense of endangering the welfare of children" and pointed members to the operative lines in the bill.

The sponsor urged passage as protective: "I urge you, please, to protect the children of Montana. Vote green," Fuller said in closing.

Opponents argued the bill would criminalize parents and health-care providers and carry significant consequences for families and the justice system. "This bill, unfortunately, is far from simple, and it actually would criminalize, and have very, very serious consequences on the Montanans that it would impact," said Senator Newman, who urged a no vote. Senator Flowers said the bill "makes a felon out of anyone who supports or provides care to a youth 16 or younger as prescribed in the bill. This includes parents, guardians, physicians, and any other health care providers." Flowers also raised fiscal concerns, noting there was no fiscal note accounting for costs to district courts, public defenders, or corrections.

Other debate focused on constitutional limits and on whether the bill's language implicitly reached beyond the written text. Sponsor Fuller said the amendment only targets the listed procedures and that prosecutorial discretion and constitutional review would apply. Several senators raised questions about how child-welfare removals or prosecutions might proceed; Fuller and colleagues referenced existing child-welfare statutes and prosecutorial discretion in responses.

The clerk recorded the vote 30 in favor and 20 opposed; the committee reported the bill do pass on second reading and it moved forward in the process.

Votes at second reading: 30 ayes, 20 nays.