Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Minor Medical Consent topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears arguments for and against allowing minors in specific situations to consent to their own medical care (LB 11-61)
Summary
LB1161 would allow pregnant minors, minors who are parents, and 18-year-olds to consent to their own medical care; proponents including pediatric and perinatal experts said the change would improve access to timely prenatal and other care, while opponents warned it would cut parents out of critical decisions and could enable abortions without parental notification unless amended.
Senator Margot Juarez (D- District 5) introduced LB1161, saying the bill would allow three groups to consent to their own medical care: minors who are pregnant or experiencing pregnancy-related conditions, minors who are parents of dependent children under eight, and 18-year-olds. "My true intention with the bill is to allow minors to consent to pregnancy related care and focus on medical consent generally," she said, adding she would consider an amendment to narrow the scope around abortion if needed.
Proponents included clinicians and public-health advocates who cited data on inadequate prenatal care among teens and linked earlier access to better maternal and neonatal outcomes. Dr. Sydney Carraher, a neonatal nurse practitioner and executive director of the Nebraska Perinatal Quality Improvement Collaborative, said late prenatal care increases complications, preterm births and NICU admissions. Pediatricians and adolescent-medicine physicians said Nebraska is an outlier in barring 18-year-olds from general medical consent.
Opponents—family-policy groups and religious organizations—said LB1161 removes parents from critical decisions and could isolate teens at risk of coercion or abuse. Some witnesses and senators discussed possible targeted amendments, such as exempting abortion care or limiting the bill to 18-year-olds; opponents said even narrower changes would not fully address their concerns.
The committee asked sponsors and medical testifiers how the bill would work in practice—for example, when a minor lacks any supportive adult, whether judicial bypass routes already exist for emergency or abortion-related scenarios, and how providers would assess decision-making capacity. No formal action was taken at the hearing; sponsors signaled willingness to work on clarifying amendments.
