Committee Summary for Senate Education (04/01/2025)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
HB10 00:17:28.280 - 8:16:19 AM	Public Hearing	establishing the parental bill of rights.	Packard, Sherman(R)[Spkr]2024

HB10: Representative Sherman Packard, Rockingham 16 Support00:17:28.280 - 8:16:19 AM; Representative Packard introduced House Bill 10, emphasizing that the bill aims to reaffirm the rights of parents over the upbringing of their children. He clarified that schools should focus on teaching subjects like history, mathematics, and English, and not take on the role of raising children. He mentioned a small change in the bill and an amendment prepared to correct a mistake from legislative services, but deferred further details to Representative D'Simone and Marco, who worked on the amendment.
HB10: Deborah D'Simone, Rockingham 18 Atkinson Support00:19:41.220 - 8:18:32 AM; Deborah D'Simone supported House Bill 10, arguing that New Hampshire's foundation of 'live free or die' supports strong family values and good parenting. She stressed the importance of parents' rights, which she feels have been eroding over time. D'Simone highlighted the critical role of parents during their children's teenage years, a period fraught with challenges and new life options. She expressed confusion over why any legislator, particularly a parent, would oppose this legislation, emphasizing that existing laws already address any wrongdoing by parents.
HB10: Unnamed Speaker Support00:21:50.559 - 8:20:41 AM; The unnamed speaker continued to support House Bill 10, discussing the collaborative effort with Representative Markel and Representative Packard to refine the bill after a similar one failed to pass the previous year. The speaker reiterated the importance of parents being responsible for raising their children, pointing out that most parents are law-abiding and focused on raising productive members of society.
HB10: Unnamed Speaker Support00:22:38.799 - 8:21:29 AM; The speaker emphasized the extensive effort put into crafting HB10, involving consultations with child psychologists, teachers, pediatricians, parents, and children. They highlighted a poll indicating strong public support for parents having the final say in their children's education, with a significant majority across political affiliations. The speaker argued for the bill's necessity, stating it ensures parents are informed about their child's school activities and supports parental involvement in education.
HB10: Unnamed Speaker Support00:23:27.159 - 8:22:18 AM; The speaker continued to support HB10, stressing the importance of transparency and parental rights in education. They refuted claims that the bill is harmful, citing the bill's affirmation of parents' fundamental rights to direct their children's upbringing, education, and care. They also mentioned the state's role in intervening if a parent's actions are detrimental to a child's health and well-being.
HB10: Unnamed Speaker Support00:24:14.640 - 8:23:05 AM; Further support for HB10 was expressed, emphasizing the necessity of both parents being involved in a child's life for their thriving. The speaker criticized the notion that schools know better than parents about what's best for children and called for a collaborative effort between parents and educators. They also addressed past instances where parents were labeled negatively for seeking transparency.
HB10: Unnamed Speaker Support00:26:01.159 - 8:24:52 AM; The speaker concluded their support for HB10 by asserting that the bill provides necessary protection and transparency for parents. They urged the committee to pass the bill and send it to the governor for her signature. They also clarified that an amendment is forthcoming, which would only involve a technical correction to an RSA.
HB10: Unnamed Speaker Information Only00:26:45.840 - 8:25:36 AM; The speaker provided information about an upcoming amendment to HB10, clarifying that it does not replace the bill but corrects a technical error in an RSA. They confirmed that the version under discussion was as amended by the House.
HB10: Unnamed Speaker Information Only00:28:03.600 - 8:26:54 AM; The speaker addressed questions regarding the depth of medical records access under HB10, particularly concerning psychiatry records. They clarified that the bill deals with medical records and that parents already have the right to access their child's medical records as personal representatives, except in specific legal situations.
HB10: Unnamed Speaker Support00:32:03.840 - 8:30:54 AM; The speaker shared a personal anecdote about a child who became ill due to a reaction to birth control, emphasizing the importance of parental involvement in children's health decisions. They argued that children around the age of 11 or 12 need guidance from parents to navigate difficult years, supporting the provision in the bill that aligns with existing federal and state laws.
HB10: Representative D. Simone Information Only00:33:23.039 - 8:32:14 AM; Representative D. Simone discussed the section of the bill related to school board notifications on parental rights. They questioned the necessity of the bill, pointing out that similar provisions already exist in policy and law. They raised concerns about the administrative burden and costs associated with implementing the bill, questioning how it would be managed and funded.
HB10: Unnamed Speaker Support00:34:09.520 - 8:33:00 AM; The speaker explained that the bill's provisions would be included in the annual student handbook, negating the need for a fiscal note (FN). They justified the bill by stating that consolidating parental rights into one section would make it easier for parents, schools, and legal staff to access relevant laws, despite these rights already being scattered throughout existing statutes.
HB10: Unnamed Speaker Oppose00:36:45.920 - 8:35:36 AM; The speaker expressed concerns about the bill adding new requirements beyond consolidating existing laws. They specifically mentioned the immediate response requirement on page two, lines seven to ten, and questioned how this would affect teachers' workload, suggesting that it might detract from other important duties.
HB10: Unnamed Speaker Support00:39:06.599 - 8:37:57 AM; The speaker addressed the concern about the immediate response requirement, clarifying that the bill allows up to five days for teachers to respond if they cannot do so immediately. This provision aims to balance the need for timely information with the practicalities of teachers' workloads, emphasizing the importance of partnership between parents and schools.
HB10: Senator Information Only00:41:55.200 - 8:40:46 AM; The Senator thanked the previous speaker for clarifying the immediacy of responses and inquired about the nature of information that parents might request from teachers. They questioned whether teachers would be expected to monitor students' social activities to answer such inquiries.
HB10: Unknown Speaker Information Only00:42:47.480 - 8:41:38 AM; The speaker discusses the scope of reporting required by educators under the proposed bill. They clarify that the bill does not require teachers to report everything they overhear or observe about students, such as conversations with peers or social interactions, unless a parent specifically asks. The emphasis is on not asking teachers to investigate or act as detectives, but to respond truthfully to parental inquiries with the information they have.
HB10: Unknown Speaker Information Only00:44:17.359 - 8:43:08 AM; The speaker continues the discussion on the bill, focusing on the section about access and review of medical records. They mention an example of a prescription with a contraindication and discuss the exceptions under HIPAA, particularly when Medicare or Medicaid is involved. The speaker defers a detailed question on this topic to Representative Markel, indicating a need for more in-depth knowledge on the subject.
HB10: Unknown Speaker Oppose00:46:07.079 - 8:44:58 AM; The speaker raises concerns about the bill's section on parental consent for healthcare services, questioning whether it applies only within schools or more broadly. They express worry about the bill's potential conflict with existing laws that allow minors to access certain healthcare services without parental consent, such as STD protection and birth control. The speaker, identifying as a healthcare provider and a member of the Health and Human Services Committee, is concerned about the implications for minors who might not have a trusting relationship with their parents.
HB10: Unknown Speaker Support00:48:36.000 - 8:47:27 AM; The speaker supports the bill, emphasizing the importance of parental involvement in their children's healthcare and education. They argue that good parents should have open dialogues with their children about sensitive issues and that the law already provides for situations where parents might not be good actors. The speaker stresses the bill's aim to consolidate parental rights and protect children's well-being, ensuring they grow into strong, independent adults.
HB10: Senator Sullivan Information Only00:51:04.040 - 8:49:55 AM; Senator Sullivan clarifies a section of the bill that states exceptions as provided by law or court order, addressing concerns about healthcare services and prescriptions. They discuss the difference between prescribing services and procedures, suggesting a need for further clarification on what is lawful in this context. The senator appreciates the questions raised and hopes for collaborative work on the bill.
HB10: Unknown Speaker Information Only00:53:18.240 - 8:52:09 AM; The speaker shares a personal anecdote about their family's challenging year and how the school's concern for their daughter's well-being led to immediate action. They emphasize that the bill does not expect teachers to investigate every aspect of students' lives but encourages collaboration between parents and educators to ensure children's health and well-being.
HB10: Senator Alchill Information Only00:57:01.280 - 8:55:52 AM; Senator Alchill questions the bill's new chapter on parental rights, focusing on the right to opt out of certain educational programs related to sex education and AIDS. They express curiosity about why AIDS education is grouped with sexuality education and inquire about the responsibilities outlined in the bill, suggesting a need for balance between rights and responsibilities.
HB10: Unnamed Speaker Oppose00:58:32.880 - 8:57:23 AM; The speaker questions the necessity of creating a new law that removes vital health education, specifically referencing the historical case of Ryan White to illustrate the importance of education about acquired immune deficiency syndrome. They share a personal anecdote about opting their child out of sex education due to disagreement with the material, emphasizing that such rights are already established in existing statutes. The speaker challenges the addition of new elements to the statutes and the removal of existing ones, arguing that education about acquired immune deficiency syndrome should not be conflated with sex education.
HB10: Unnamed Speaker Support01:00:30.160 - 8:59:21 AM; The speaker argues that the bill does not prevent schools from teaching about acquired immune deficiency syndrome but allows parents who choose to educate their children at home to do so. They emphasize that this right is already in statute and does not affect the majority of parents who are content with school-based education.
HB10: Oliver Bonama, Resident of New Hampshire Oppose01:04:33.760 - 9:03:24 AM; Oliver Bonama, a student at a private institution due to severe bullying in public schools, opposes the bill. He argues that many sections of the bill are redundant with existing New Hampshire education laws. His main concerns are with sections that could lead to the non-consensual outing of LGBTQ+ students, potentially increasing their risk of harassment and abuse. He also criticizes the broad parental objection rights to instructional materials based on morality, religion, and perceived harm, which could allow for censorship of important educational content. Oliver emphasizes the importance of comprehensive sex education in preventing unplanned pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases.
HB10: Unnamed Speaker Information Only01:09:24.640 - 9:08:15 AM; The speaker discusses the legal aspects of parental rights and responsibilities, particularly in the context of separated or divorced parents. They reference the New Hampshire Supreme Court and RSA 461A, explaining that parents have rights to access their children's records, subject to certain restrictions and court orders. They use the case of Berg to illustrate how the state balances parental rights with the well-being of children. The speaker emphasizes that the bill's provisions are permissive, not binding, allowing parents to choose whether to withdraw their children from certain classes. They also touch on the rights of children, noting that children do not have a full range of rights due to their age and maturity.
HB10: David Trumbull from the town of Ware Oppose01:18:56.080 - 9:17:47 AM; David Trumbull opposed HB10 for two main reasons. First, he argued that the bill contradicts the New Hampshire Constitution as per a recent Supreme Court ruling in the case of Doe versus Manchester School District. The court used the rational basis test, not the strict scrutiny test as proposed by the bill, and ruled that parental rights are not absolute in school settings and that schools do not limit parental rights. The court also provided several self-help remedies for parents. Second, Trumbull stated that the bill infringes on children's rights and could lead to harm, including increased teenage homelessness among LGBTQ youth. He highlighted that the bill forces schools to out LGBTQ students to their parents, which could lead to unsafe situations at home. He also mentioned that the bill's provisions on child abuse and neglect come into effect too late, after a child has already been harmed.
HB10: Senator Alchiller Information Only01:22:49.920 - 9:21:40 AM; Senator Alchiller asked David Trumbull about the relationship between students and extracurricular activity leaders like coaches, librarians, and club organizers, and how HB10 might affect these relationships. Trumbull responded by sharing his experience as a coach for over 40 years, emphasizing the importance of trusted adults in a child's life, especially when home might not be safe. He noted that children with a trusted adult are significantly less likely to attempt suicide, and that the bill could deter children from confiding in these adults due to mandatory disclosure requirements.
HB10: Senator Abbas Information Only01:24:48.000 - 9:23:39 AM; Senator Abbas questioned David Trumbull about the legality of parents kicking minors out of their homes, suggesting it might constitute abuse or neglect. Trumbull agreed it would likely be illegal, particularly for younger minors, but pointed out that the bill's provisions on child welfare come too late, after a child has already been harmed. He emphasized the damage done by mandatory outing of LGBTQ students, which could lead to homelessness and strained family relationships, and shared a testimony from a parent who had changed his views on homosexuality over time.
HB10: Senator Information Only01:27:48.400 - 9:26:39 AM; A senator asked David Trumbull about the implications of the bill for parents who are not homophobic and are genuinely trying to be involved in their child's life. Trumbull explained that the bill does not prevent schools from communicating with parents, and in cases where parents are supportive, schools are likely to share information. He reiterated that the concern is for students who fear unsafe reactions from their parents upon disclosure of their sexual orientation.
HB10: Senator Alchilla Information Only01:28:35.280 - 9:27:26 AM; Senator Alchilla asked David Trumbull about his experiences as a coach and the role of trusted adults outside the home for students who do not feel safe discussing their issues at home. Trumbull confirmed the importance of such adults, especially when the home environment is not open or affirming, and agreed that supportive family units typically do not necessitate seeking external trusted adults.
HB10: Schiller Oppose01:30:02.000 - 9:28:53 AM; Schiller expressed concerns that HB10 would create a chilling effect on school staff, making them hesitant to engage in conversations with students due to fear of disciplinary action. This could disrupt the safe and collaborative environment between parents, children, and teachers, which Schiller believes is crucial for a child's development.
HB10: Evan Wagert, Durham, NH Oppose01:30:55.199 - 9:29:46 AM; Evan Wagert, a transgender resident of Durham, NH, and a counselor at UNH, opposed HB10, emphasizing the importance of schools as safe spaces for queer and trans youth. Wagert shared personal experiences of being a role model and the first trusted adult for many queer youth, arguing that the bill would isolate these children and hinder their ability to express their identities freely.
HB10: Cassandra Sanchez, Child Advocate for the State of New Hampshire Oppose01:33:54.639 - 9:32:45 AM; Cassandra Sanchez, along with attorney Lissa Matthew, expressed concerns about HB10's impact on child welfare and safety. Sanchez highlighted the lack of direct references to the Child Protection Act (169C) in the bill, which could lead to delays in reporting critical information to child welfare authorities. She also raised concerns about the bill's potential to interfere with criminal investigations and the safety of children, particularly in cases where information needs to be withheld from parents. Additionally, Sanchez discussed the implications of the bill on healthcare providers, noting the potential for disciplinary action against them, which could deter them from providing necessary care to children.
HB10: Senator Alula Information Only01:37:47.840 - 9:36:38 AM; Senator Alula engaged in a dialogue with Cassandra Sanchez, focusing on the impact of HB10 on vulnerable youth, particularly those in the LGBTQ+ community. Sanchez emphasized the importance of trusted relationships between children and school adults, which could be jeopardized by the bill. She also discussed the high prevalence of LGBTQ+ youth in care due to lack of acceptance at home and the need for these children to have support from trusted adults at school. Additionally, Sanchez raised concerns about the bill's lack of exceptions for parents whose children are in the child welfare system, where parental rights remain intact despite the child's removal from the home.
HB10: Unknown Speaker Oppose01:43:41.119 - 9:42:32 AM; The speaker expressed concerns about the potential dangers of the bill for children who are part of the LGBTQ community. They argued that the bill could give parents more rights over decision-making in their children's lives, which could be counterproductive to the growth and safety of these children. The speaker believes the bill lacks safeguards for these vulnerable children.
HB10: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:44:26.880 - 9:43:17 AM; The speaker, who has experience as a parent attorney and a DCYF attorney, discussed the child welfare system's focus on reunifying families. They mentioned that legislation aimed at strengthening this focus was tabled in the House. The speaker emphasized the need for guardrails during the reunification process to ensure the safety and well-being of children, particularly when parents are not ready to make necessary changes. They highlighted the role of social workers in assessing families and connecting them to community services like therapy to support the child's identity and educate parents.
HB10: Senator Sullivan Information Only01:47:45.600 - 9:46:36 AM; Senator Sullivan sought clarification on a statement made by a previous speaker regarding teachers' awareness of ongoing investigations. The speaker clarified that they were not suggesting teachers should withhold information from parents but highlighted the need for caution to avoid impeding criminal investigations. They emphasized the importance of communication between schools and parents but raised concerns about the bill potentially leading to unintended consequences.
HB10: Senator Abbas Information Only01:50:39.520 - 9:49:30 AM; Senator Abbas questioned the implications of the bill on medical records and law enforcement investigations. They discussed the role of schools as mandated reporters and the potential for the bill to complicate the handling of sensitive information. The speaker expressed confusion about the bill's language and its application to different entities holding records.
HB10: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:53:50.560 - 9:52:41 AM; The speaker addressed concerns about parental consent for medical procedures for minors. They discussed the existing laws requiring parental consent for non-emergent procedures and the potential chilling effect of adding penalties for medical practitioners. The speaker emphasized the importance of maintaining current protections for minors seeking birth control and other medical services.
HB10: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:57:58.400 - 9:56:49 AM; The speaker continued the discussion on the bill's impact on medical consent and the potential for creating confusion by compiling various rights into one place without clear carveouts. They highlighted the risk of unintended consequences and the need for clarity in the law to avoid misinterpretation by the public.
HB10: Unknown Speaker Information Only02:00:39.679 - 9:59:30 AM; The speaker discussed the potential conflicts between the bill and existing statutes, particularly regarding parental rights and responsibilities. They questioned which statute would take precedence in case of a conflict and emphasized the complexity of the bill.
HB10: Unknown Speaker Information Only02:02:13.280 - 10:01:04 AM; The speaker discusses the scope of HB10, noting that it extends beyond education into medical procedures. They raise concerns about the bill's interaction with existing statutes, particularly RSA 461, which deals with parental rights and responsibilities. The speaker questions how HB10 might clash with these existing laws and suggests that the committee consider these implications.
HB10: Unknown Speaker Information Only02:03:02.560 - 10:01:53 AM; The speaker continues the discussion on HB10, focusing on its impact on family court and the absence of strict scrutiny as provided in RSA 461. They express concern about the potential conflicts and suggest that the committee should consider how HB10 might affect child custody laws and the best interests of children, as defined in RSA 461A.
HB10: Unknown Speaker Information Only02:03:48.800 - 10:02:39 AM; The speaker elaborates on the potential conflicts between HB10 and existing statutes like RSA 169C and RSA 461A. They mention their experience in private family law and highlight the judiciary's role in statutory interpretation, suggesting that the absence of certain cross-references in HB10 could lead to judicial interpretation and potential conflicts.
HB10: Unknown Speaker Information Only02:04:58.239 - 10:03:49 AM; The speaker questions the extent to which HB10 impacts child custody law, moving away from educational concerns. They express concern about the potential for increased conflict in domestic relations and suggest that the committee consider ways to minimize the bill's impact on this area.
HB10: Unknown Speaker Information Only02:05:47.199 - 10:04:38 AM; The speaker raises concerns about the implications of HB10 on healthcare services, particularly the requirement for parental consent. They question the clarity and potential confusion that could arise from the bill's language and its placement within an education-related bill, suggesting that healthcare providers might not be aware of these changes.
HB10: Jacob Bennett, Chester Oppose02:09:29.119 - 10:08:20 AM; Jacob Bennett, a resident of Chester, opposes HB10. He criticizes the bill for not recognizing children's rights and for potentially undermining the safety of students. Bennett references past statements by the Commissioner of Education and comments by Representatives Roy and Osborne, suggesting that the bill's subtext implies educators are a threat to students. He argues that the bill does not provide safety for children and should be revised to include children's rights.
HB10: Representative Peter Patrino, Milford Oppose02:12:16.199 - 10:11:07 AM; Representative Peter Patrino from Milford opposes HB10 while supporting parental rights. He argues that the bill does not consolidate all parental rights as claimed and highlights the absence of certain rights, such as notification of seclusion and restraint. Patrino criticizes the bill's provision allowing parents to inquire about any matter related to their child, calling it unconstitutional and dangerous. He believes it conflicts with the Department of Education's trusted adult program and could put children at risk. He suggests that the committee consider the Senate version, SB 72, instead.
HB10: Senator Aler Information Only02:15:29.360 - 10:14:20 AM; Senator Aler asked Representative Peter Patrino about the 'One Trusted Adult' program in New Hampshire, which aims to provide vulnerable children with a trusted adult to confide in, separate from their parents. Representative Patrino explained the program's purpose and shared his experience as a teacher, noting that while he rarely encountered students with personal problems, the program is essential for children who need someone to listen without fear of their concerns being relayed to their parents.
HB10: Mary Banfield, Parental Rights Advocate, New Hampshire Support02:16:31.920 - 10:15:22 AM; Mary Banfield expressed support for HB10 but suggested amendments to include parental consent for mental health care assessments or services and data sharing, as outlined in the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). She highlighted a case where a Manchester parent sued the school district for not sharing information about their child, emphasizing the importance of parental rights in law to guide judicial interpretations. Banfield also mentioned the potential of the bill to bridge the gap between schools and parents, preventing families from leaving public schools due to anti-parental rights policies.
HB10: Senator Sullivan Information Only02:20:33.760 - 10:19:24 AM; Senator Sullivan discussed the trust parents place in schools when sending their children there, emphasizing that schools should work in partnership with parents, not exclude them. She referenced the ESSA's emphasis on parent engagement and suggested that HB10 could help bridge the gap between schools and parents, ensuring compliance with federal laws regarding mental health consent.
HB10: Deborah H, President, American Federation of Teachers New Hampshire Oppose02:23:49.720 - 10:22:40 AM; Deborah H opposed HB10, citing concerns over the bill's language being overly broad and unworkable, particularly the requirement for immediate and complete disclosure to parents. She argued that such a standard has been rejected by the New Hampshire Supreme Court and could lead to legal challenges. She also discussed the need for parents to engage with school boards to shape academic standards rather than micromanaging classroom activities. Deborah H expressed concerns about the potential for parents to object to instructional materials, which could hinder effective teaching and curriculum development.
HB10: Senator Sullivan Information Only02:32:43.040 - 10:31:34 AM; Senator Sullivan asked Deborah H about the implications of parents opting out of certain educational content, such as HIV education, due to personal family circumstances. She shared her experience of requesting prior notification for her children's education on this topic to explain her husband's non-contagious illness first. She also raised concerns about the safety of children in schools, referencing cases of bullying and sexual assault by teachers, and questioned the safety of schools as a utopia for children.
HB10: Courtney Reed, ACLU of New Hampshire Oppose02:38:53.920 - 10:37:44 AM; Courtney Reed, a policy advocate with the ACLU of New Hampshire, expressed opposition to House Bill 10, highlighting concerns about the bill's vague language, particularly on page two, line 71A. She argued that the bill's requirement for 'complete and immediate' disclosure could harm LGBTQ students and place educators in a difficult position. Reed emphasized that while parents have a right to be involved in their child's education, the bill risks disclosing private student information without consent, potentially causing harm. She also noted the absence of exemptions in the bill for situations where withholding information might protect a child from abuse or neglect, and stressed the importance of a safe and welcoming school environment for all students.
HB10: Brian Hawkins Oppose02:41:57.280 - 10:40:48 AM; Brian Hawkins opposed House Bill 10, focusing on the addition made by the House on page two, lines 7 through 10. He raised concerns similar to those with Senate Bill 96, particularly about the requirement for 'complete and honest' responses from school personnel. Hawkins questioned the implications of this requirement, such as the potential for educators to violate the law unintentionally due to forgetfulness. He suggested that such matters should be handled through school board policies or employment situations rather than state law, emphasizing the importance of communication between educators and parents.
HB10: Nancy Beerman, Rare Disease Advisory Council Support02:45:28.080 - 10:44:19 AM; Nancy Beerman, a former teacher and parent of children with chronic illnesses, supported House Bill 10 for its provisions on parental rights concerning medical concerns. She shared her experiences with her daughter's multiple rare diseases and the fear of being accused of child abuse before a diagnosis. Beerman highlighted issues with data breaches and the importance of trust between parents and teachers, especially in cases where children might not disclose their conditions due to fear of worrying their parents. She stressed the necessity of open communication between parents and educators to ensure the well-being of children with medical conditions.
HB10: Kate Cook, Parent Oppose02:51:23.399 - 10:50:14 AM; Kate Cook, a parent of a non-binary child, opposed House Bill 10, sharing her experience of her child using different pronouns and a name at school without her knowledge. She expressed concern about the safety of children who might not feel safe at home if their gender identity were disclosed to their parents. Cook emphasized that her child's decision was not about hiding their identity but about respecting a family name. She argued that the bill could endanger children by outing them to potentially unsafe home environments and noted that her child chose to leave New Hampshire for college due to such legislation.
HB10: Courtney Tanner, Dartmouth Health Information Only02:55:22.880 - 10:54:13 AM; Courtney Tanner, Senior Director of Government Relations at Dartmouth Health, provided information on House Bill 10, focusing on provisions related to medical records and parental consent. She emphasized the importance of involving parents in their children's treatment plans while acknowledging exceptions, such as child welfare provisions. Tanner also mentioned House Bill 560, which deals with parental access to medical records, and expressed concerns about the current bill's lack of consideration for restraining orders and child welfare circumstances. She suggested that the bill needs significant revisions to address these issues effectively.
HB10: Courtney Tanner, Dartmouth Health Oppose03:08:10.399 - 11:07:01 AM; Courtney Tanner continued their testimony, expressing concerns about House Bill 10. They emphasized the need for more specific language in the bill, particularly around the provision that could be clarified to include regulations as well as laws and court orders. Tanner also discussed Dartmouth Health's policy on parental involvement in medical procedures for minors, highlighting that while they always champion parental involvement, there are circumstances where this may not be possible or appropriate, such as in cases involving child welfare or certain disease states. They noted potential confusion in the bill's current form and suggested that a comprehensive list of carveouts by age could be beneficial for potential amendments.
HB10: Kathy Stratton, New Hampshire Medical Society Oppose03:13:47.200 - 11:12:38 AM; Kathy Stratton, representing the New Hampshire Medical Society, testified in opposition to HB10. She highlighted the bill's interference with the physician-patient relationship, the confusion it creates regarding physicians' discretion to protect patients, and the establishment of misdemeanor penalties for physicians treating minors. Stratton expressed concerns about the bill's co-mingling of educational and healthcare provisions and the lack of clear exceptions, particularly in child custody cases. She focused on the requirement for written parental consent for healthcare services, which could delay or prevent necessary care for minors in urgent situations such as substance use disorders, mental health crises, and reproductive health issues.
HB10: Liz Canada, Planned Parenthood of Northern New England and Planned Parenthood New Hampshire Action Fund Oppose03:20:46.960 - 11:19:37 AM; Liz Canada focused on the implications of HB10 on sexual and reproductive healthcare for teenagers. She clarified that currently, teenagers can access confidential birth control under Title 10 protections, but this would change if HB10 passes, limiting access to only Title 10-funded providers. Canada also pointed out the lack of legal provisions allowing teenagers to consent to healthcare during pregnancy or for conditions like yeast infections. She emphasized the importance of teenagers being able to discuss healthcare with providers confidentially, which could be compromised by the bill. Additionally, she raised a question about whether HB10 would require parental consent for abortions, potentially further restricting abortion access in New Hampshire.
HB10: Liz Canada, Planned Parenthood of Northern New England and Planned Parenthood New Hampshire Action Fund Oppose03:20:46.960 - 11:19:37 AM; Liz Canada expressed opposition to HB10, discussing the implications of the bill on teenagers' access to birth control. She highlighted that currently, there is no explicit right for teenagers to access birth control, but there are also no restrictions, allowing them to obtain it confidentially through Title 10 providers. She warned about the potential negative consequences of similar laws in other states, such as increased teen pregnancy rates, and raised concerns about the ambiguity of the bill regarding over-the-counter birth control and condom sales.
HB10: Senator Abbas Information Only03:24:52.080 - 11:23:43 AM; Senator Abbas asked Liz Canada to provide additional laws or regulations that were alluded to but not explicitly mentioned in her testimony. Liz agreed to email the committee with further details and distribute her testimony.
HB10: Senator Ailla Information Only03:25:50.319 - 11:24:41 AM; Senator Ailla sought clarification from Liz Canada on the current legal status of teenagers accessing birth control, confirming that there is no affirmative right but also no restriction, allowing access through providers and over-the-counter methods. Liz Canada elaborated on the implications of HB10, expressing concerns about its potential to restrict access to reproductive healthcare services.

Ward, Ruth(Chairman)(R)[C+]2024	Sullivan, Victoria(V Chairman)(R)	Prentiss, Suzanne(D)[F]2024
Altschiller, Debra(D)[CT]2024	Abbas, Daryl(R)[C+]2024