BabySafeHaven
03-11-2004, 03:24 PM
MASSACHUSETTS
http://www.eagletribune.com/framesets/searcharch.htm
Thursday, March 11, 2004
Former opponents now behind Safe Haven baby-drop bill
By Shawn Regan
Staff Writer
BOSTON -- Massachusetts could become the 42nd state in the country to pass a
"safe havens" law designating hospitals and police and fire stations as places
distressed parents may abandon unwanted babies.
The House, which in 2002 passed a previous version of the legislation by a
144-10 vote only to see it killed in the Senate, was scheduled to vote on the
new version this morning. But if it passes the House, the bill's chances in the
Senate look much better this time, if senators follow the example of two key
North of Boston lawmakers.
State Sens. Steven A. Baddour, D-Methuen, and Thomas M. McGee, D-Lynn, who led
the opposition to the bill in the Senate last time, said they are now prepared
to support it because of three changes: the period a baby can be lawfully left
at a safe haven was reduced from 30 days to seven; a "sunset" or expiration
clause requiring reauthorization of the law in two years was added; and a
commission to track whether the law leads to an increase in abandoned babies
was included.
Under the proposal, those dropping off babies would be issued a bracelet for
identification purposes, but they wouldn't be forced to give their name.
Proponents say the legislation would help prevent infants from being abandoned
in parking lots, Dumpsters and public restrooms -- scenarios that have made
headlines in recent years. Opponents say such a law would be tantamount to
condoning child abandonment. A better way to combat the problem, they say, is
to bolster adoption programs to help desperate mothers.
"Most of those senators who were opposed to (safe havens) were involved in the
compromise," McGee said. "So that says to me it has a pretty good chance."
An aide for Baddour said the senator would prefer the window for abandoning
babies be capped at three days, but that he is prepared to support the
legislation as long as the House approves the compromise language.
Under the compromise, parents who drop off babies who are not abused or
neglected would be eligible for some legal protection. But unlike previous
versions, parents who abandon their babies would not have total immunity from
prosecution in cases of abuse or neglect -- another important change for
Baddour.
"He won't vote for it unless it is clear that if you drop off an abused baby,
there's no amnesty," Baddour aide Warren Postman said.
The bill's sponsor, Rep. Barry R. Finegold, D-Andover, said he drafted it after
reading media accounts of Baby Mae, an infant abandoned in a paper bag in a
parking lot in Worcester several years ago. The baby was almost run over until
a passerby found her.
Rep. Mary Grant, D-Beverly, an adolescent psychiatric nurse, said she is
inclined to vote for safe havens, but that she will listen to today's debate
before committing either way.
"It's designed to be safety net, a last resort against a child being left in
harm's way out of fear," said Grant, who applauded the work of the Children's
Caucus in hammering out a compromise with some of the bill's critics.
State Rep. Bradford R. Hill, R-Ipswich, said he doesn't believe there's much of
a need for safe havens in his district, but that he supports the bill on its
merits.
"When you see some of the terrible cases of babies being left in Dumpsters in
inner cities like Lawrence, obviously I'd like to help do something about
that," Hill said. "I don't like giving parents the right to discard their
babies, but you have to weigh the upside with the downside."
Reps. David M. Torrisi, D-North Andover, and Brian S. Dempsey, D-Haverhill,
adamantly oppose the bill. Torrisi, who intended to speak against the bill this
morning, said he is disappointed it will be debated the same day the
Legislature is reconvening its Constitutional Convention to consider banning
gay marriage.
"I don't feel it's going to get the attention it deserves from the public, the
press or other lawmakers," Torrisi said. "Legalizing child abandonment it not
the way to go. This bill is bad social policy. You can't legislate away all of
society's problems."
http://www.eagletribune.com/framesets/searcharch.htm
Thursday, March 11, 2004
Former opponents now behind Safe Haven baby-drop bill
By Shawn Regan
Staff Writer
BOSTON -- Massachusetts could become the 42nd state in the country to pass a
"safe havens" law designating hospitals and police and fire stations as places
distressed parents may abandon unwanted babies.
The House, which in 2002 passed a previous version of the legislation by a
144-10 vote only to see it killed in the Senate, was scheduled to vote on the
new version this morning. But if it passes the House, the bill's chances in the
Senate look much better this time, if senators follow the example of two key
North of Boston lawmakers.
State Sens. Steven A. Baddour, D-Methuen, and Thomas M. McGee, D-Lynn, who led
the opposition to the bill in the Senate last time, said they are now prepared
to support it because of three changes: the period a baby can be lawfully left
at a safe haven was reduced from 30 days to seven; a "sunset" or expiration
clause requiring reauthorization of the law in two years was added; and a
commission to track whether the law leads to an increase in abandoned babies
was included.
Under the proposal, those dropping off babies would be issued a bracelet for
identification purposes, but they wouldn't be forced to give their name.
Proponents say the legislation would help prevent infants from being abandoned
in parking lots, Dumpsters and public restrooms -- scenarios that have made
headlines in recent years. Opponents say such a law would be tantamount to
condoning child abandonment. A better way to combat the problem, they say, is
to bolster adoption programs to help desperate mothers.
"Most of those senators who were opposed to (safe havens) were involved in the
compromise," McGee said. "So that says to me it has a pretty good chance."
An aide for Baddour said the senator would prefer the window for abandoning
babies be capped at three days, but that he is prepared to support the
legislation as long as the House approves the compromise language.
Under the compromise, parents who drop off babies who are not abused or
neglected would be eligible for some legal protection. But unlike previous
versions, parents who abandon their babies would not have total immunity from
prosecution in cases of abuse or neglect -- another important change for
Baddour.
"He won't vote for it unless it is clear that if you drop off an abused baby,
there's no amnesty," Baddour aide Warren Postman said.
The bill's sponsor, Rep. Barry R. Finegold, D-Andover, said he drafted it after
reading media accounts of Baby Mae, an infant abandoned in a paper bag in a
parking lot in Worcester several years ago. The baby was almost run over until
a passerby found her.
Rep. Mary Grant, D-Beverly, an adolescent psychiatric nurse, said she is
inclined to vote for safe havens, but that she will listen to today's debate
before committing either way.
"It's designed to be safety net, a last resort against a child being left in
harm's way out of fear," said Grant, who applauded the work of the Children's
Caucus in hammering out a compromise with some of the bill's critics.
State Rep. Bradford R. Hill, R-Ipswich, said he doesn't believe there's much of
a need for safe havens in his district, but that he supports the bill on its
merits.
"When you see some of the terrible cases of babies being left in Dumpsters in
inner cities like Lawrence, obviously I'd like to help do something about
that," Hill said. "I don't like giving parents the right to discard their
babies, but you have to weigh the upside with the downside."
Reps. David M. Torrisi, D-North Andover, and Brian S. Dempsey, D-Haverhill,
adamantly oppose the bill. Torrisi, who intended to speak against the bill this
morning, said he is disappointed it will be debated the same day the
Legislature is reconvening its Constitutional Convention to consider banning
gay marriage.
"I don't feel it's going to get the attention it deserves from the public, the
press or other lawmakers," Torrisi said. "Legalizing child abandonment it not
the way to go. This bill is bad social policy. You can't legislate away all of
society's problems."
