Abortion Foes Win a Major Victory From Senate Panel

In a major victory for opponents of abortion, a state Senate committee Wednesday night approved a bitterly contested bill that would require a pregnant minor to receive parental permission or a court order before undergoing an abortion.

At an angry hearing, the Senate Health and Human Services Committee voted unexpected 6-2 approval for the heavily lobbied Assembly-passed bill and sent it on to the Appropriations Committee where passage appears likely.

For years, opponents of abortion have been on the losing side of legislative and court battles in California. But in small bites, they have gained momentum in the Legislature, particularly among reelection-conscious Democrats.

Representatives of both sides of the issue had forecast the Senate committee would be the key test of strength during the current session. Proponents earlier predicted that if the bill reached Gov. George Deukmejian, who has generally sided with anti-abortion forces, he would sign it.

The committee endorsed similar politically sensitive and emotionally charged legislation last year, largely on the correct assumption that it would be killed in the Assembly.

Reversal of Roles

However, in an abrupt reversal of roles, the Assembly earlier this summer passed the parental consent bill by Assemblyman Robert C. Frazee (R-Carlsbad), an action that put the burden on the Senate committee.

The measure needed five favorable votes for passage by the nine-member panel, whose members had been regarded as evenly balanced on the issue with Sen. Henry Mello (D-Watsonville) seen as the swing vote. Mello, who voted for the bill, was targeted for heavy lobbying by so-called pro-life organizations in his politically conservative district. The surprise extra vote was cast by Sen. Art Torres (D-Los Angeles), whom both sides regarded as a pro-choice lawmaker.

Basically, the bill would require an unemancipated minor to receive parental consent before undergoing an abortion. If permission were denied, the minor could seek an order from the Superior Court.

Opponents insisted that fear of revealing their pregnancy to parents would drive young women to “back alley” abortionists and that pregnancy is an issue between the woman, regardless of her age, and her physician.

Frazee and others insisted, however, that such an important decision should include parents. They testified that most minors are not mature enough to make such an important decision on their own.

‘A Child, Not an Adult’

One proponent, Assemblywoman Cathie Wright (R-Simi Valley), told the committee that, “It is a child--not an adult woman--deciding on what she is going to do with her body.”

Frazee noted that for children to take a school field trip, they must obtain permission from their parents. He called it “incredible” that current law enables a minor to receive an abortion without her parents’ knowledge or consent.

“The issue is, should a child without parental consent be taken for a serious medical procedure,” he said.

However, Torres, a lawyer and the father of a 6-year-old daughter, expressed major concerns about how the courts would handle the new burden of ordering or denying an abortion and noted that the measure was estimated by the state Judicial Council to cost about $1.1 million a year.

The bill contained no appropriation and Frazee successfully resisted an effort to include the money, contending that he would accept no amendments. Proponents noted that if the bill was amended in any way in the Senate, it would be returned to the hostile Assembly Judiciary Committee, which likely would kill it.

In its current form, the bill never received a hearing before the Judiciary Committee.

Sen. Diane Watson (D-Los Angeles), chairwoman of the Senate committee and an outspoken pro- choice advocate, offered a series of unsuccessful amendments and was accused by proponents of the bill of unnecessarily stretching out the hearing.