CPRC (CT Parental Rights Coalition) SB 858, Position Statement For Immediate Release: February 24, 2019 [email protected]
CPRC OPPOSITION TO SB 858 An Act Concerning the Prophylactic Treatment of Minors for Sexually Transmitted Diseases Without the Consent of Parents. SB 858 proposes to separate minor children from their parents, perform physical examination and, administer unspecified prophylactic medical treatment without parental consent or knowledge. SB 858 violates the Constitutionally protected right of parents. The Parental Rights doctrine; as established by the Supreme Court in several cases, clarifies that Parents have the primary authority in the upbringing and medical decisions of their children. The Parental Rights Doctrine is consistently upheld and protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth amendment of the United States Constitution. These rights are fundamental and delineated above the State:
“…This primary role of the parents in the upbringing of their children is now established beyond debate…”1 “…[T]he custody, care and nurture of the child reside[s] first in the parents, whose primary function and freedom include preparation for obligations the state can neither supply nor hinder...”2 “…The child is not the mere creature of the State…”3
SB 858- Separating minor children from their parent(s), performing physical examination, and/or administering medical treatment without parental consent or knowledge violates Constitutionally protected Parental Rights, the Parental Rights doctrine as established and consistently upheld by the Supreme Court and furthermore, protected by the Fourteenth Amendment Therefore; CPRC opposes SB 858 and, we ask the PH Committee to vote “no” on SB 858. CPRC is the union of 11 citizen groups throughout CT, representing approximately 40,000 CT residents. The Coalition has worked with legislators by submitting research, evidence and expert legal counsel. We are committed to the safety of children and the rights of parents. 1) Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972) 2) Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158, 166 (1944). 3) Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510, 535 (1925)