Governor Sent Consent Bill for Teen Abortions : Requirement for Parental Approval Passed by Senate; Deukmejian Expected to Sign Legislation

Legislation requiring unwed minors to obtain parental consent or court approval before having an abortion won easy passage in the Senate on Thursday and was sent to Gov. George Deukmejian, who is expected to sign it.

The Senate also passed and returned to the Assembly a companion measure that appropriates $1.5 million to pay for additional court costs, counseling and legal help for minors--those under 18--who seek judicial permission for an abortion rather than obtain their parents’ consent.

“This bill gives some responsibility back to parents, where it belongs,” said Sen. Joseph B. Montoya (D-Whittier), who managed the parental consent bill on the Senate floor. “Adult, mature women must live with their own consciences and make this decision. We are talking about youngsters not mature enough to make these kinds of decisions for themselves.”

Bipartisan Support

The parental consent bill passed on a bipartisan 25-11 vote. The companion money measure needed a two-thirds majority vote and barely got it, passing 27 to 8.

It is the first time that both houses of the Legislature have approved such a bill, and it took careful maneuvering in the Assembly to keep the measure out of that house’s Judiciary Committee, which has rejected similar proposals several times in the past. The provisions requiring parental consent were inserted on the Assembly floor into a bill that had already cleared the Judiciary Committee.

Once the bill, sponsored by Assemblyman Robert C. Frazee (R-Carlsbad), made it to the more conservative Senate, its supporters had only to keep the measure from being amended, which would have returned it to the Assembly and almost certain defeat.

The parental consent bill, which would take effect Jan. 1 if signed by the governor, requires that no abortion be performed on an unwed minor unless she first has given her written consent and also has obtained the written consent of one of her parents or her legal guardian. Not affected would be “emancipated” minors who have been removed from their parents’ control by court order.

Failing that, a pregnant girl could file a petition with the Juvenile Court, which in confidential proceedings would have three days to decide whether to grant permission for the abortion. If the Juvenile Court denied the girl’s request, she would be able to appeal the decision, although the bill does not specify how that process would work.

Neither the girl nor her parents could be charged any fees for the legal procedures required by the measure.

The bill makes it a misdemeanor punishable by a maximum 30 days in jail and a $1,000 fine for any person to knowingly perform an abortion on an unmarried minor without proper consent.

The Senate’s approval of both bills came after a debate during which several sponsors urged their colleagues to consider what their attitude would be if their own minor daughter were pregnant and considering an abortion.

‘Want to Be There’

“I want to be there for my daughter,” said Sen. Art Torres (D-Los Angeles). “I want her to be able to come and talk to me.”

Other supporters of the bill described the measure as “pro-family” and predicted that it would bring parents and their children together in a time of stress.

“Please don’t undersell parents,” said Sen. Marian Bergeson (R-Newport Beach). “Maybe these kids who find they can’t communicate with their parents really haven’t tried. Taking away parental responsibility only drives the wedge deeper between parent and child.”

But opponents, who conceded from the beginning that they were clearly outnumbered on the issue, argued that the bill would do nothing to bring families together and might even drive them farther apart.

“This is a great deal of wishful thinking to think we can pass a law and, voila! , we are going to improve communication between parents and their youngsters,” said Sen. Gary K. Hart (D-Santa Barbara). Hart said the measure, which he dubbed the “lawyers’ full-employment act of 1987,” would only flood the courts with petitions from girls who cannot get or do not want to seek their parents’ consent.

‘Really Upset’

Outside the legislative chambers, Shireen Miles, California director for the National Organization for Women, said: “We’re really upset. Some young girls are going to die as a result of this. We understand legislators’ eagerness to try in some way to increase parental control, but it’s an illusion. Parental communication is not obtained by coercion. . . .

“This does not improve parent-child communication, and it doesn’t reduce pregnancies. It’s a big hoax, a tragic hoax.”

On the other side, Barbara Alby, president of the Women’s Lobby, which backed the bill, called it a “wonderful landmark victory for families and for kids. It’s going to put the parents in the role of protecting their kids from those who could take advantage of them in the abortion industry. Right now, the people who profit from abortion have free access to our children.”