Representatives from the Catholic Diocese of Manchester and NARAL Pro-Choice New Hampshire found themselves in an odd spot at the State House yesterday: agreeing in opposition to an abortion bill. Odder still, the state's biggest reproductive care provider, Planned Parenthood, was pitted against many of its pro-choice allies.

The bill, sponsored by several Democratic state senators, would require a girl under the age of 17 to have a counseling session with a doctor, nurse or other licensed professional before obtaining an abortion. At a hearing yesterday, supporters say the legislation would provide a state standard for what, by all accounts, abortion clinics already do. Some opponents say the bill is aimed at giving cover to Democrats on the contentious issue of abortions for minors, an argument backers rejected yesterday.

"It is not middle ground. It is not compromise. It is not a political solution," said Sen. Kathy Sgambati, a Tilton Democrat and the bill's lead sponsor. "I believe it is an insurance policy for our young people. . . . It honors and supports their decision while assuring parents that their daughter's health and well-being is protected. Anything short of that puts them at risk."

Some opponents, like Dianne Murphy Quinlan of the diocese, argued that the bill would put health care workers in a role that should be played by a girl's parents. Others, from NARAL and from the Feminist Health Centers in Concord and Portsmouth, argued that by legislating what happens in a doctor's office, the bill would lead to increases in staffing costs and litigation.

Oglesby Young, a Concord obstetrician-gynecologist and president of the New Hampshire Medical Society, said while he believes in counseling, he is opposed to the legislation and finds it unnecessary.

"Superb and comprehensive counseling has always been provided for women in this state for 30 years prior to an abortion," Young said. "Is there evidence that this has changed?"

If the state were to provide "codified counseling" before abortion, he wondered why it wouldn't mandate discussions before other procedures. "The passage of this bill may well signify the beginning of a sad state of medicine, where we must codify all the words that as physicians we share in counseling our patients," Young said.

The bill could provide fodder for civil lawsuits, said Ann McLane Kuster, a Concord attorney lobbying for NARAL on the issue.

A representative from Planned Parenthood of Northern New England disagreed. Ann Larney, formerly of the state attorney general's office, said she sees no risk of increased litigation. The bill, she said, codifies the procedures Planned Parenthood follows at its seven centers in the state.

"This bill presents a balanced approach," Larney said. "It protects teens' health and safety, but it also facilitates the discussion between the teen and the parent."

Sgambati said it's not unusual for the state to have additional oversight for minors - it already mandates years in school, immunization and work schedules, in addition to intervening during some family crises.

"The state is involved in every aspect of a young person's life," she said.

Under the bill, a pre-abortion counseling session would have to include discussion of including the minor's parents and would require a counselor to discuss all the options facing the girl, including keeping the baby, adoption and abortion. The girl would have to sign a document attesting that she had the conversation.

Yesterday, Sgambati offered two amendments to the original bill: one to delete an unintended provision about rule-making and another to expand the definition of counselor to include "health care assistants" under the supervision of a licensed professional. Some pro-choice groups had raised concerns that unlicensed but trained counselors at Feminist Health Centers would lose their jobs under the bill.

"There is no intent that they be excluded from continuing to do their work," Sgambati said.

Single page