HARTFORD, Conn. — The state House of Representatives in Connecticut voted overwhelmingly Thursday night to codify into state law that minors can consent to contraception without parental notification.

After a lengthy debate, the House voted 117 – 27 as four Democrats joined with 23 Republicans against the measure.

The issue of parental notification of abortion has been controversial for years, but the bill focused only on contraception rather than abortion. Even thought the word ‘abortion’ was never mentioned in the legislation, it came up constantly during the debate that lasted past 7:30 p.m.

“This bill is going to prevent pregnancies,” said Rep. Nicole Klarides-Ditria, a Seymour Republican. “It is going to prevent abortions. … We want to make sure that our minors have the ability to get the care safely and without fear of repercussions from anyone. … In a perfect world, we all want our kids to talk to us every day about everything we do. But unfortunately, we know that doesn’t happen.”

She added, “This bill, I truly believe, will help prevent unwanted pregnancies, and that’s the most important thing we need to do here today.”

The debate focused on House Bill 7213, which was supported by Planned Parenthood of Southern New England.

The bill “simply codifies what has already been an established practice in Connecticut and dozens of other states by allowing minors to consent to contraception without involving a parent,” Planned Parenthood said in a flier distributed at the state Capitol in Hartford.

Concerns were raised following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in 2022 in the Dobbs case, which overturned the landmark Roe v. Wade ruling and sent the establishment of abortion regulations back to the states.

“Now is the time to make sure the Connecticut code reflects common practice in this state and protects patients and providers,” the flier said. “It’s time for our state to join the 24 states and D.C. who allow all minors to consent to contraceptive care without parental involvement.”

Rep. Cristin McCarthy Vahey, a Fairfield Democrat, and others said the issues of abortion and sex are not decided along traditional political and ideological lines but are intertwined with religion, culture and gender.

“It’s sometimes a difficult conversation for us to have in this chamber,” she said on the House floor.

Despite the longstanding practice in Connecticut that minors do not need to notify their parents, she said, “This is not currently codified in our statutes.”

Rep. Aimee Berger-Girvalo, a Ridgefield Democrat, said she did not speak for 30 years about having an abortion, even to her close friends and her mother.

“I had no intention of speaking about it to anyone,” she said Thursday. “It was something private, and I didn’t think it was appropriate to share it with anyone. … It is personal. It is private. It is my story.”

State Rep. Mark Anderson, a Granby Republican, said that he has heard in the House chamber that the human brain is not fully formed until the age of 25. He asked how a minor, aged 12 to 17, could make an important decision on an abortion.

“Connecticut is on the wrong side of being an outlier,” he said. “It should require not just notification, but consent.”

Rep. Cara Pavalock D’Amato, a Republican attorney, said a 12-year-old girl in Bristol became pregnant by her stepfather.

“When somebody that young gets pregnant, there’s something wrong,” she said. “How did a 12-year-old get pregnant? … Clearly, here, the guardian, stepdad was not the person she could go to.”

Sections removed

A key development was that multiple other changes in abortion regulations that had been contemplated were dropped by the legislature. The move marked a victory for the Roman Catholic Church, which lobbied strongly against changing regulations that have been in practice for decades.

One of the most controversial changes would have involved ending the long-running state exemption for doctors, nurses, and medical personnel who object to participating in abortions for religious reasons.

Another regulation that could have been eliminated requires doctors and nurses to use lifesaving measures if a premature infant survives an abortion.

The third regulation under discussion states that “abortions may be performed only when necessary to preserve the life or health of the expectant mother” during her third trimester of pregnancy.

But those regulations were not in the final version of the bill and will not be changed.

“We’re grateful that enough legislators saw these were extreme polices,” said Christopher C. Healy, the executive director of the Connecticut Catholic Conference that represents the Roman Catholic bishops.

He added, “Legislators realized what the public supports – maintaining critical protections for young women, the unborn child and the religious freedom of medical providers. The efforts to remove these regulations were troubling and extreme. We are thankful common sense and decency prevailed. We are disappointed that the House failed to recognize parental rights when it came to the well-being of children by rejecting an amendment on parental notification when a minor seeks an abortion.”

A public hearing was held last year in Hartford on changing the regulations led to two hours of often-passionate testimony as opponents and proponents disagreed sharply over the proposal for eliminating the provisions that were considered by many to have been settled. Opponents said the state public health department lacked the authority to make the changes without the approval of the legislature.

The bill that was passed Thursday, lawmakers said, was watered down from the original version.

“What we have now is a completely different piece of legislation because the unconscionable parts are out of it,” said Rep. Greg Howard, a Stonington Republican who is the father of two sons. “I think it’s a good bill for young women and the prevention of abortions in Connecticut.”

House Speaker Matt Ritter, a Hartford Democrat who is a strong proponent of reproductive rights, said before the vote that the bill was “just clarifying it after Dobbs.”

He added, “We all hope that children feel comfortable talking to their parents, but it’s not everybody’s reality. We also talked about how a 17-year-old boy can walk into a pharmacy and provide protection for himself. A woman doesn’t have that same ability. So we think we’ll have votes on both sides of the aisle.”

-----------

—Christopher Keating can be reached at ckeating@courant.com

----------

©2025 Hartford Courant. Visit at courant.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.