THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1997, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Wednesday, January 29, 1997 TAG: 9701290475
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A1 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY WARREN FISKE AND LAURA LAFAY, STAFF WRITERS
DATELINE: RICHMOND LENGTH: 92 lines
A proposed state constitutional amendment guaranteeing parents a ``fundamental right'' to ``direct the upbringing and education of their children'' was killed by Senate Democrats Tuesday amid grim predictions that it would bury schools in an avalanche of lawsuits and facilitate child abuse.
The resolution, similar to ones introduced in 19 other state legislatures this year, has been championed by Christian conservatives who say the rights of parents should be constitutionally enshrined.
Although the resolution is dead for this year, the debate surrounding it is expected to remain very much alive. Influential social conservative groups have promised to make it an issue in this fall's elections for governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general and all 100 seats in the House of Delegates.
Opponents have maintained that such amendments would enable parents to challenge on constitutional grounds school policies they dislike and laws that promote the safety and well-being of children.
In Virginia, the resolution was backed by Republicans - including Gov. George F. Allen and Atty. Gen. James S. Gilmore III. It failed Tuesday on a 21-19 vote, with all the Senate's Democrats and one Republican, Sen. Jane Woods of Fairfax, opposing it. Woods, who often opposes her party on ideological issues, said she voted against the resolution because of concerns about the language and possible impact of the amendment.
The amendment reads: ``The right of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children is a fundamental right.''
A fundamental right is one that cannot be overridden except to promote a compelling state interest. Backers deny that such a right would allow parents to abuse their children, keep them out of school or deny them life-sustaining medical treatment. But University of Virginia Constitutional scholar A.E. Dick Howard said the potential reach of the amendment is not clear.
``The fact that most people are good parents doesn't make all people good parents,'' said Howard.
``There are cases where the welfare of the child becomes paramount. Suppose some militia decides that the Commonwealth has no police power over how they deal with their children? I don't think that's a fanciful hypothetical.''
During an emotional 90-minute debate, many Democrats criticized the language of the proposed amendment for ``excess broadness and lack of specificity.''
Its sponsor, Sen. Stephen H. Martin, R-Chesterfield, was unable to identify specific reasons it is needed or problems it would address.
``There are no specific concerns . . . that would prompt this amendment,'' he said. ``The feeling is, Virginia parents ought to be able to look at the Bill of Rights.''
Sen. R. Edward Houck, D-Spottsylvania, replied: ``This matter comes before us through no compelling need in the Commonwealth. What we're doing is creating a legal trap for our public school system.''
Some Democrats characterized the amendment as an elegantly veiled assault on public education and child welfare. ``This amendment unleashes a lot of people who distrust the system,'' said Sen. Henry L. Marsh III, D-Richmond.
Democratic Leader Richard L. Saslaw of Fairfax County even brought up Sharon Bottoms, the Richmond mother whose son was taken from her by the courts because she is a lesbian.
``The minute this becomes part of our constitution, guess what, guys? She gets that kid back!'' he thundered to his colleagues.
Republicans ridiculed such predictions, saying that the resolution would simply cement existing law.
``What we have heard here today,'' said Hanover County Republican William T. Bolling, ``is that giving parents the fundamental right to direct the upbringing and the education of their children would wreck our schools, jeopardize the health and safety of the children of Virginia, cause a general degradation in the character of our society, constitute an assault upon our commonwealth's attorneys, our judges, our school boards, our law enforcement system, (and) the medical profession.''
``This amendment is about none of these things.''
Virginians haven't heard the last of this. ``This issue of parental rights isn't going to go away,'' warned Michael P. Farris, a constitutional lawyer and father of nine who ran for lieutenant governor in 1993 and is now president of the Home School Legal Defense Association in Purcellville.
``I think you're going to see a lot of Democrats ducking for cover.''
Saslaw, the Senate's Democratic leader, welcomed the challenge.
``Who's going to believe we're anti-parents?'' he said. ``I think the big issue will be Republicans being anti-school system.''
KEYWORDS: GENERAL ASSEMBLY 1997 ABORTION PARENTAL RIGHTS
BILL