Child Custody Protection Act - Continued
CHILD CUSTODY PROTECTION ACT--Continued -- (Senate - July 25, 2006)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about the so-called Child Custody Protection Act. This is yet another one of those divisive bills with a deceptive title and a dangerous impact on women.
Today, many Americans are upset about the direction in which our country is moving. One would think that the Republican majority would finally start addressing the real issues that affect working families every day--issues such as access to healthcare, high energy prices, fixing the prescription drug program, and protecting our ports.
But instead, we are seeing yet another debate on election year gimmick. Last month, Republicans rolled out a constitutional amendment on gay marriage just so they could energize their base. Then they brought up a constitutional amendment on flag burning. Now we have a divisive bill that threatens the health of women and undermines our rights.
It is no wonder that Americans are so frustrated with the Republican majority.
Today families are facing real challenges, and once again, what we see here is the Republican leadership is playing election year games. To me, this is just the latest example of how Republicans have the wrong priorities.
With a war overseas, painful cuts to education at home, veterans being denied healthcare, soaring energy costs, and mounting debt, the Republican majority is saying this is the most important issue we could be debating today.
They should stop wasting time on divisive election year politics and start focusing on the real challenges facing the American people.
We should be talking about pressing needs, not a dangerous and misguided bill that threatens the health of our Nation's young women.
Today's debate comes in the context of a series of attacks on women's rights.
Since 1994, we have seen a consistent and aggressive effort in Congress to limit a woman's right to choose.
There have been more than 170 antichoice votes taken in Congress since 1994. This bill follows that troubling pattern.
The legislation is not about protecting young women, or improving communication within families, or stopping sexual predators.
Instead, it is just another attempt by Republicans to chip away at a woman's right to safe and legal reproductive health care.
Let me turn to the substance of the bill.
This legislation could criminalize a grandparent, aunt, or adult sibling, for responding to a request for help from a young woman in a crisis pregnancy situation.
If any of these caring adults accompany a young woman across State lines to obtain reproductive health services, and the woman's home State has a parental-involvement law, then those caring adults could be criminally prosecuted.
Today, an amendment will be offered to exempt grandparents and clergy from this onerous bill. It is the least we can do to minimize the harm of this legislation.
But this law doesn't stop at turning caring adults into criminals. It would also criminalize anyone who transports a pregnant minor across any State line.
Imagine a young woman living in a rural area with no reproductive health service providers and the nearest facility is in a large city just over the State line. If that young woman boards a bus or takes a taxi to the city to get an abortion, the person who drives her could be criminally liable under this law and sued by the parents.
I think we all agree that a young woman facing a crisis pregnancy should be encouraged to talk to her parents. According to a study by Stanley Henshaw and Kathryn Kost, in the vast majority of these situations, the young woman does involve her parents. But tragically, in situations where women don't tell their parents, one-third of the young women are victims of abuse.
In an ideal world, every young woman would take to her parents, but we don't live in an ideal world.
The reality is that a young woman cannot always turn to a parent. We are not talking about a young woman who is afraid her parents will be ashamed or shun her. We are talking about serious situations where the young woman may be a victim of incest or abuse.
A young woman who has an abusive home situation often accurately predicts the danger of telling a parent about a pregnancy. This bill would punish those young women if they seek the support and help of other family members or clergy.
We live in a time when we have a lot of families who don't fit the traditional two-parent model. More and more grandparents are raising their grandchildren. Divorced parents are getting remarried, and young women can develop close relationships with their stepparents.
In these families, the caring adult who is responsible for the day-to-day care of a young woman would be criminally liable and could even be sued by an absentee parent.
We also know that some young women have no other alternative but to go to another State to obtain reproductive health services. Access to these services all across our country is severely limited--87 percent of counties have no providers.
There are States, such as Mississippi, that have only one provider. Our laws should reflect the reality that for some women, these services cannot be found locally.
Unfortunately, the only thing this bill does do is ensure that young women who are intent on seeking reproductive health services ``go it alone.''
If a young woman thinks that bringing a caring adult or supportive friend will get that person in trouble, she will make the trip on her own.
You wouldn't want your children to drive home from the hospital after having surgery, but this legislation will result in young women driving themselves after having a medical procedure.
How can my colleagues say that this bill is about the safety of young women when it actually endangers them more?
Proponents claim that the ``judicial bypass procedure'' is an adequate protection for young women who feel they can't involve their parents. That is not the case.
A young woman would have to go to a courthouse, get a hearing, tell the judge and anyone else in the courtroom her situation, and wait for a judge to rule.
Now imagine that this happens in a small town where the judge is friends with her parents. Whether it is a big city or a small town, a young woman who has never been to court could find the whole process intimidating and overwhelming.
This bill doesn't even have an exception to protect the health of young women. That raises huge constitutional questions.
Since Roe v. Wade, every constitutional Federal law restricting a woman's right to choice has contained a health exception, and many laws have been struck down because they lack one.
Should we really be saying that a young woman's health does not count when she faces a crisis pregnancy?
Is this Senate ready to tell young women that their health and safety do not matter?
This bill doesn't care about a young woman's health--and it barely even cares about her life. That is because the bill's exception for a life-threatening situation is very narrow and very limited.
In addition, according to experts who have studied it, this bill could effectively nullify the laws of States that allow physicians to provide confidential medical services to minors, such as my home State of Washington.
The people of my State have twice affirmed a woman's right to choose. That is the settled position of our State. This bill could reach into my home State and effectively eliminate those protections.
No matter how one feels about this bill, I think everyone should be concerned that Federal intervention could undermine the ability of States to set their own laws on this difficult subject.
The House version goes even further, potentially making criminals out of Washington State physicians who follow the laws of Washington State.
Proponents of this bill claim that it is needed to prevent sexual predators from taking pregnant young women across State lines to obtain reproductive health services against their will. But that is not how the bill is written.
If it were truly meant to prevent sexual predators from harming young women, why would it criminally prosecute a young woman's family members, including grandparents, aunts, or adult siblings? Why is the scope of this bill so broad that it includes clergy members and even unknowing taxi drivers?
Every one of us wants to reduce the numbers of abortions that occur.
Instead of forcing the Government deeper into sensitive and personal family relationships, we should focus on preventing teen pregnancies.
Mr. President, to summarize, across the country today, Americans are very worried about what is going on, whether it is access to health care, high energy prices, prescription drug programs, or protecting our Nation's security. But instead what we are seeing this afternoon is an election year gimmick.
Last year, we saw a constitutional amendment on gay marriage to energize their base, and then they brought up a constitutional amendment on flag burning, and now we are having a debate, instead of on the issues which are on the front burner for every American family, about the health of women and how we are going to undermine their rights. I find that very sad.
Let me talk a few minutes about the substance of this bill. As my colleague from California said, this is a bill which is going to criminalize a grandparent or an aunt or an adult sibling for simply responding to a request for help from a young woman who is in a crisis pregnancy situation. We will see later an amendment to exempt grandparents and clergy from this onerous bill. I hope we do that. It is the least we can do.
But I think what we should all agree on is that a woman who is facing a crisis pregnancy should be encouraged to talk to her parents. In fact, we have seen studies by Stanley Henshaw and Kathryn Kost that in the vast majority of situations, a young woman does involve her parents. But tragically, in situations where women don't tell their parents, one-third of those young women are victims of abuse. Those are the women we are going to be affecting by legislation such as this.
In an ideal world, the young woman would talk to her parents, but too often, too many young women do not live in an ideal world today. They cannot turn to a parent. We need to make sure they have the availability of health care for their needs, and this bill takes that away.
Unfortunately what this bill really does is ensure that young women who are intent on seeking reproductive health services go it alone. If a young woman thinks that bringing a caring adult or supportive friend will get that person in trouble, she will make that trip on her own. You wouldn't want your children to drive home from the hospital after having surgery, but this legislation is going to result in young women forced to drive themselves home after a medical procedure.
I don't see how my colleagues can say this bill is about the safety of young women when it actually endangers them more. This bill doesn't even have an exception to protect the health of young women, and that, frankly, raises huge constitutional questions about which we have heard.
This bill doesn't care about a young woman's health, it barely cares about her life, and that is because the bill's exception for a life-threatening situation is very narrow and very limited and, according to experts who studied it, this bill will effectively nullify the laws of States such as mine that allow physicians to provide confidential medical services to minors.
For that reason, I will oppose this bill, but I do commend the Senator from New Jersey, Mr. Lautenberg, who is offering an amendment that we will be voting on that is a comprehensive approach to reproductive health care for our teenagers. It will help reduce teen pregnancy, and that is its goal. That amendment would be a good step forward, but even that addition is not going to save this flawed bill.
We should be working on ways to reduce the number of crisis pregnancies among teens and women alike. That is why, on issues such as emergency contraceptives, I fought so hard to make sure the FDA makes its decision based on science on whether that drug is safe or effective.
Unfortunately, the bill we have in front of us today is just another ploy for the majority to get their base excited in an election year and, frankly, I am deeply concerned that women's lives are being used as pawns in a political debate. I believe women's rights should never be traded away in a ploy for votes.
I hope we send a message that we know our country is facing serious challenges and we are going to spend our very limited time addressing those challenges and fighting for all of our families.
I urge my colleagues to vote against this dangerous, divisive, and misguided bill.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://thomas.loc.gov