CWA Issues Critical Remarks Concerning Slow Moving Parental Notification Legislation
Senate Fails to Enact Child Custody Protection Act Eight Years and Counting
5/17/2006
By Jan LaRue, Chief Counsel
Custody of a child ought to matter as much as custody of a car.
In 1995, Rosa Hartford took a 13-year-old girl she barely knew, who her adult son had raped when the girl was 12, from Pennsylvania into New York.
There, Hartford posed as the girl’s stepmother and facilitated the girl’s abortion without her mother’s knowledge or consent and absent any legal justification. She then abandoned the girl 30 miles from her home with serious medical complications from an incomplete abortion, where she would have died but for her mother’s frantic and successful efforts to find her and obtain medical care.
Anyone, including a total stranger, who takes your minor daughter for an abortion across a state line without your consent, in order to avoid a state parental notice or consent law, faces no liability under federal law. The Child Custody Protection Act (CCPA) would support state parental notice and consent laws such as Pennsylvania’s, which Rosa Hartford crossed a state line to avoid.
Although 70 percent of Americans favor parental notice or consent before a minor can obtain an abortion, Congress has failed to enact a federal law that prohibits a person to take a minor across state lines in circumvention of state laws. Despite the testimony of Joyce Farley, the mother of Hartford’s victim, and others before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 1998, Congress has failed to act. Although the U.S. House of Representatives has passed the CCPA four times, the U.S. Senate, and the Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) in particular, have done nothing.
The Senate needs to explain its refusal to pass the CCPA in light of the following federal laws:
The Freedom of Access to Clinics Act, which makes it a federal offense to interfere with someone seeking access to an abortion clinic, specifically exempts a parent or legal guardian from legal liability for activities specifically related to their minor child. The only reasonable explanation for this exception for parents is that Congress respects a parent’s right to be involved in a minor daughter’s decision about abortion.
Any parent whose parental rights have been terminated by a final court order, who kidnaps his or her child and transports the child in interstate or foreign commerce, faces life in prison. This law reinforces state parental-custody orders even against a parent who’s lost legal custody.
Anyone who lives in one state and willfully fails for a year or longer to pay a support obligation for a child who resides in another state can be fined $5,000. This law reinforces state child-support orders against an out-of-state obligee.
The Mann Act prohibits transporting any individual in interstate or foreign commerce for purposes of prostitution or any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense. Violators face up to 10 years in prison. The Supreme Court held that if anyone “employs interstate transportation as a facility of their wrongs, it may be forbidden to them.”
A person who travels in interstate or foreign commerce with the intent to engage in conduct that violates the portion of a protection order that prohibits or provides protection against contact or communication with, or physical proximity to, another person, and subsequently engages in such conduct, faces five years in federal prison. This law reinforces state restraining orders against those who would otherwise escape punishment for violating the order by traveling out-of-the state and engaging in the prohibited conduct.
Anyone who knowingly transports a stolen car in interstate or foreign commerce faces 10 years in federal prison. This law reinforces state auto-theft laws.
Anyone who knowingly transports stolen property worth $5,000 or more in interstate or foreign commerce faces up to 10 years in federal prison. This law reinforces state property-theft laws.
In 1998, the House of Representatives passed the CCPA as H.R. 3682. It was referred to the SJC where it died. The Senate version S. 1645, made it to the Senate floor but died due to a failure to invoke cloture and cut off debate. In 1999, the House passed the Act as H.R. 1218. It was placed on the Senate legislative calendar where it died.
The Senate version, S. 661, also died in the SJC in 1999. In 2002, the House passed the Act as H.R. 476. It was referred to the SJC where it died. In 2003, the Act, as House bill H.R. 1755 and Senate bill S. 851, failed to make it out of either the House or Senate Judiciary Committee. In 2005, the Act, as S. 403, never made it to a committee, and S. 8 and S. 396 both died in the SJC.
The House passed the CCPA under a new title, “The Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act,” as H.R. 748. It was placed on the Senate legislative calendar where it remains in limbo.
Do we see a pattern here?
Contrary to the abortion lobby’s claims, state legislatures that have enacted parental involvement laws have done so because they rightly recognize that loving families are a pregnant girl’s best resource and protection. Any industry desperate enough to argue that a pregnant minor girl is safer having an unfettered right to a dangerous medical procedure than she is in seeking the guidance of parents who love her ought to be ignored by the U.S. Senate.
Dr. Bruce Lucero, a self-described pro-choice physician, agrees. A New York Times article that quoted Lucero was placed in the record of the 1998 SJC hearing on the CCPA. According to Lucero:
In these kinds of cases, the best help adults close to the teen-age girls, be they relatives or others, can give is not to go along with the teenager’s desire for concealment by bringing her across state lines, but rather to encourage her to talk to her parents. … Parents are usually the ones who can best help their teen-ager consider her options. And whatever the girl’s decision, parents can provide the necessary emotional support and financial assistance.
Even in a conservative state like Alabama, I found that parents were almost always supportive. If a teen-ager seeks an abortion out of state, however, things become infinitely more complicated. Instead of telling her parents, she may delay her abortion and try to scrape together enough money – usually $150 to $300 – herself. As a result, she often waits too long and then has to turn to her parents for help to pay for a more expensive and riskier second-trimester abortion.
Also, patients who receive abortions at out-of-state clinics frequently do not return for follow-up care, which can lead to dangerous complications. And a teenager who has an abortion across state lines without her parents’ knowledge is even less likely to tell them she is having complications. Hearing on S. 1645, the Child Custody Protection Act, before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, 105th Cong., 2d Sess. (May 20, 1998).
Furthermore, the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld state laws that require notification or consent of a parent before a minor daughter may obtain an abortion, if the law provides for a judicial bypass rather than parental notice or consent, e.g., Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth.
Every version of the CCPA exempts a parent, legal guardian, custodian of a minor and the minor from prosecution, as well as any abortion that is necessary to save the life of the minor. There is a defense if the defendant reasonably believes that the parental notification/consent/judicial process has occurred.
On May 15, 2006, the Senate passed by unanimous consent S. 479, which designated May 1, 2006, as “National Child Care Worthy Wage Day,” and calls on the people of the United States to observe the day by “honoring early childhood care and education staff and programs in their communities.” The Senate passed this moot and trivial resolution instead of the CCPA.
The Senate needs to hear from those who think a parent’s custody of a minor daughter deserves at least as much federal protection as custody of the family car.
5/17/2006
By Jan LaRue, Chief Counsel
Custody of a child ought to matter as much as custody of a car.
In 1995, Rosa Hartford took a 13-year-old girl she barely knew, who her adult son had raped when the girl was 12, from Pennsylvania into New York.
There, Hartford posed as the girl’s stepmother and facilitated the girl’s abortion without her mother’s knowledge or consent and absent any legal justification. She then abandoned the girl 30 miles from her home with serious medical complications from an incomplete abortion, where she would have died but for her mother’s frantic and successful efforts to find her and obtain medical care.
Anyone, including a total stranger, who takes your minor daughter for an abortion across a state line without your consent, in order to avoid a state parental notice or consent law, faces no liability under federal law. The Child Custody Protection Act (CCPA) would support state parental notice and consent laws such as Pennsylvania’s, which Rosa Hartford crossed a state line to avoid.
Although 70 percent of Americans favor parental notice or consent before a minor can obtain an abortion, Congress has failed to enact a federal law that prohibits a person to take a minor across state lines in circumvention of state laws. Despite the testimony of Joyce Farley, the mother of Hartford’s victim, and others before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 1998, Congress has failed to act. Although the U.S. House of Representatives has passed the CCPA four times, the U.S. Senate, and the Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) in particular, have done nothing.
The Senate needs to explain its refusal to pass the CCPA in light of the following federal laws:
The Freedom of Access to Clinics Act, which makes it a federal offense to interfere with someone seeking access to an abortion clinic, specifically exempts a parent or legal guardian from legal liability for activities specifically related to their minor child. The only reasonable explanation for this exception for parents is that Congress respects a parent’s right to be involved in a minor daughter’s decision about abortion.
Any parent whose parental rights have been terminated by a final court order, who kidnaps his or her child and transports the child in interstate or foreign commerce, faces life in prison. This law reinforces state parental-custody orders even against a parent who’s lost legal custody.
Anyone who lives in one state and willfully fails for a year or longer to pay a support obligation for a child who resides in another state can be fined $5,000. This law reinforces state child-support orders against an out-of-state obligee.
The Mann Act prohibits transporting any individual in interstate or foreign commerce for purposes of prostitution or any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense. Violators face up to 10 years in prison. The Supreme Court held that if anyone “employs interstate transportation as a facility of their wrongs, it may be forbidden to them.”
A person who travels in interstate or foreign commerce with the intent to engage in conduct that violates the portion of a protection order that prohibits or provides protection against contact or communication with, or physical proximity to, another person, and subsequently engages in such conduct, faces five years in federal prison. This law reinforces state restraining orders against those who would otherwise escape punishment for violating the order by traveling out-of-the state and engaging in the prohibited conduct.
Anyone who knowingly transports a stolen car in interstate or foreign commerce faces 10 years in federal prison. This law reinforces state auto-theft laws.
Anyone who knowingly transports stolen property worth $5,000 or more in interstate or foreign commerce faces up to 10 years in federal prison. This law reinforces state property-theft laws.
In 1998, the House of Representatives passed the CCPA as H.R. 3682. It was referred to the SJC where it died. The Senate version S. 1645, made it to the Senate floor but died due to a failure to invoke cloture and cut off debate. In 1999, the House passed the Act as H.R. 1218. It was placed on the Senate legislative calendar where it died.
The Senate version, S. 661, also died in the SJC in 1999. In 2002, the House passed the Act as H.R. 476. It was referred to the SJC where it died. In 2003, the Act, as House bill H.R. 1755 and Senate bill S. 851, failed to make it out of either the House or Senate Judiciary Committee. In 2005, the Act, as S. 403, never made it to a committee, and S. 8 and S. 396 both died in the SJC.
The House passed the CCPA under a new title, “The Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act,” as H.R. 748. It was placed on the Senate legislative calendar where it remains in limbo.
Do we see a pattern here?
Contrary to the abortion lobby’s claims, state legislatures that have enacted parental involvement laws have done so because they rightly recognize that loving families are a pregnant girl’s best resource and protection. Any industry desperate enough to argue that a pregnant minor girl is safer having an unfettered right to a dangerous medical procedure than she is in seeking the guidance of parents who love her ought to be ignored by the U.S. Senate.
Dr. Bruce Lucero, a self-described pro-choice physician, agrees. A New York Times article that quoted Lucero was placed in the record of the 1998 SJC hearing on the CCPA. According to Lucero:
In these kinds of cases, the best help adults close to the teen-age girls, be they relatives or others, can give is not to go along with the teenager’s desire for concealment by bringing her across state lines, but rather to encourage her to talk to her parents. … Parents are usually the ones who can best help their teen-ager consider her options. And whatever the girl’s decision, parents can provide the necessary emotional support and financial assistance.
Even in a conservative state like Alabama, I found that parents were almost always supportive. If a teen-ager seeks an abortion out of state, however, things become infinitely more complicated. Instead of telling her parents, she may delay her abortion and try to scrape together enough money – usually $150 to $300 – herself. As a result, she often waits too long and then has to turn to her parents for help to pay for a more expensive and riskier second-trimester abortion.
Also, patients who receive abortions at out-of-state clinics frequently do not return for follow-up care, which can lead to dangerous complications. And a teenager who has an abortion across state lines without her parents’ knowledge is even less likely to tell them she is having complications. Hearing on S. 1645, the Child Custody Protection Act, before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, 105th Cong., 2d Sess. (May 20, 1998).
Furthermore, the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld state laws that require notification or consent of a parent before a minor daughter may obtain an abortion, if the law provides for a judicial bypass rather than parental notice or consent, e.g., Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth.
Every version of the CCPA exempts a parent, legal guardian, custodian of a minor and the minor from prosecution, as well as any abortion that is necessary to save the life of the minor. There is a defense if the defendant reasonably believes that the parental notification/consent/judicial process has occurred.
On May 15, 2006, the Senate passed by unanimous consent S. 479, which designated May 1, 2006, as “National Child Care Worthy Wage Day,” and calls on the people of the United States to observe the day by “honoring early childhood care and education staff and programs in their communities.” The Senate passed this moot and trivial resolution instead of the CCPA.
The Senate needs to hear from those who think a parent’s custody of a minor daughter deserves at least as much federal protection as custody of the family car.
posted by Michael Burns at 11:39 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home