CT lawmakers seek parental alerts for abortions. Advocates says parents can be the problem

Hartford Courant – Tuesday, March 3, 2026
By Christopher Keating

State legislators are grappling over the highly controversial issue of whether parents should be notified before their minor daughter can obtain an abortion.

In a blue state that has strongly supported abortion rights for decades, the public hearing was unusual because the Democrats who control both chambers of the legislature traditionally have had the authority and the votes to block various bills.

Advocates for the Roman Catholic Church said the hearing by the legislature on House Bill 5309 marked the first ever to be held in Connecticut on parental notice. During a debate on a Republican amendment on the issue last year, a key Democratic leader said on the House floor that the amendment would not be approved but that lawmakers would first hold a public hearing on the issue this year.

The issue has divided pro-choice and pro-life advocates for years, and that remained the case on Monday.

Lawmakers noted that there is a key difference between parental notification and parental consent. Notification means that a parent under the bill would be informed 48 hours before an abortion on a minor under the age of 16, while consent would require written permission before an abortion could be performed.

The measure has been pushed since 2019 by Rep. Brian Lanoue, a conservative Republican from Jewett City who represents five towns in eastern Connecticut. He told lawmakers on the judiciary committee that 38 states have either parental notification or parental consent, including neighboring states.

“We’re one of the few states that do not have parental notification,” Lanoue said. “Massachusetts and Rhode Island to the east have parental consent. We’re asking for a lower standard. … Ultimately, it’s going to be the girl’s decision.”

Lanoue said it is highly important for young girls to seek guidance from their parents.

“If I was a father, for example, I would want to sit down with my daughter and have a conversation,” Lanoue said. “I do not have a daughter. I do not have children.”

State Rep. Jillian Gilchrest, a West Hartford Democrat who is among the legislature’s leading advocates for abortion rights, said during Lanoue’s testimony that she is opposed to the proposal. Gilchrest briefly questioned Lanoue during the hearing but did not get into a debate with him.

Later, Gilchrest said that most young people currently come to their parents for help and she would want the same thing for her own child.

“But as a social worker by training, I have worked with young people who could not safely involve a parent,” Gilchrest said. “I have seen cases where a parent was abusive — including cases where the parent who would be notified raped and impregnated their child. Those situations are real, not hypothetical. I am not willing to abandon young abuse victims.”

She added, “Every young person deserves access to timely, confidential health care. Connecticut already requires comprehensive counseling for minors seeking abortion care. HB 5309 would create barriers for vulnerable youth, and that’s why I oppose it and support the state’s current law.”

Deacon David Reynolds, representing the Roman Catholic bishops of Connecticut, said the bill covers girls aged 12 to 15 years old and “is not an attack on women’s reproductive rights.”

The six-page bill, Reynolds said, represents “a correction of existing legislation, which is flawed.”

No decisions were made Monday during an hours-long hearing that focused on 12 different bills with testimony from more than 100 witnesses on a wide variety of issues under the committee’s purview. Lawmakers face a committee deadline of March 30 to make recommendations on bills, and the legislative session ends on May 6.

Testimony

Witnesses on both sides of the issue stepped forward Monday both in person at the state Capitol complex in Hartford and via Zoom.

Kathleen Johnson, the chief executive officer of the St. Gerard’s Center for Life, said in her previous role as a school nurse that she could not administer Tylenol to a minor without parental consent.

“Connecticut is currently among a minority of states that do not require parental notification,” Johnson said. “At a time when we ask parents to consent to field trips, medications, and medical procedures for their children, it is difficult to justify excluding them from one of the most serious medical decisions a young girl can face.”

Noting that abortion is a medical procedure, Johnson said, “Beyond the physical recovery, many women need emotional support. … A minor should not have to process something so weighty. … Most importantly, teenage girls need support.”

Grace Williams, a student at the Yale School of Public Health, testified against the bill, saying that one in five pregnant minors in the United States has experienced physical abuse from a parent or caregiver, citing statistics from an advocacy group regarding abortion.

“I grew up in Alabama, where abortion access is already limited,” Williams told lawmakers, adding that the issue is important for minors “who live in unsafe or unstable homes.”

At the other end of the spectrum at the university, Aalia Holt, the leader of a group known as Choose Life at Yale, favored the bill.

“Minors are not in a position to make life-altering decisions on their own,” said Holt, who is 20 years old. “Daughters need their parents fully informed.”

Meghana Kudrimoti, a resident physician at the Yale School of Medicine, testified against the bill, saying that new restrictions are not needed in Connecticut at a time when there are more restrictions in recent years in states across the nation.

The current system has been working without issue for the last 36 years,” she said in written testimony. “As an OB/GYN, I care for young people seeking reproductive healthcare on a daily basis. Many of them are in school with bright futures ahead of them. I had a conversation with one young 15 year‐old patient recently in the emergency department; she told me about her dreams of becoming a doctor some day, too. … I have seen firsthand how providing abortion healthcare to young people can impact the trajectory of their entire lives, ensuring their bodily autonomy and allowing them to continue dreaming about their futures.”

Mark Desrosiers, a deacon in the Catholic Church who is a retired dentist, said that he needed the consent of a parent or guardian to provide dental care for a minor.

“Consider your own children,” Desrosiers told lawmakers. “Don’t you want to know what treatment they will receive? As an adult and a parent, you have knowledge, judgment, and maturity that a minor does not. You are the one best positioned to select the best options for your daughter.”

He added that “those who are against the bills are the ones who are benefitting financially from abortions on minors.”

The hearing was held after approval by the committee leaders who set the agenda. Those decisions, however, are separate from whether lawmakers will actually vote on the issue at the committee level.

“The judiciary committee has always worked on a bipartisan basis,” Rep. Steve Stafstrom of Bridgeport said in a statement released by a staff member. “There were some bills on today’s agenda that the Reproductive Rights Caucus wanted raised, and there were some related bills that the Republicans wanted raised.”

Lanoue said he had not been guaranteed that there will be a vote by the Democratic-controlled judiciary committee, but he said he is optimistic.

“Let’s have a vote,” Lanoue told The Courant. “Let’s get this in front of the entire legislature.”

Access this article at its original source.