Health-care decisions; require parental consent for those affecting unemancipated minors with limited exceptions.
SB 2893 would establish in Mississippi law that a parent of an unemancipated minor has a fundamental right to direct the child’s upbringing, education, and care, including health care. It would also require health-care providers, institutions, and other persons to obtain parental consent before providing health care to an unemancipated minor, while preserving specified exceptions for blanket parental consent, children in state custody, emergency and mental-health crisis situations, blood donation, infectious-disease testing, emergency medical services, and reasonable non-emergency first aid.
The bill also revises who may consent for a minor when a parent’s authority has been suspended or terminated, allowing certain relatives or other responsible adults to act in a defined priority order. In addition, it provides liability protection for providers who reasonably and in good faith rely on someone’s representation that they are the minor’s parent. The measure repeals two existing confidentiality/consent exceptions for treatment of venereal disease and for certain substance-related mental or emotional problems in minors age 15 and older, and it narrows Section 41-42-7 by removing the authority of certain individuals and entities to refer minors for contraceptive supplies and information. The act would take effect July 1, 2025.
SB 2893 would significantly amend Mississippi’s minor-consent and parental-rights statutes, especially Section 41-41-3, by elevating parental authority over a minor’s health-care decisions and making parental consent the default rule. It would also repeal Sections 41-41-13 and 41-41-14, eliminating existing statutory provisions that allowed certain treatment for venereal disease and certain alcohol- or drug-related mental health care for minors without parental consent or notice. The bill further changes Section 41-42-7 to restrict who may refer minors for contraceptive supplies and information, affecting physicians, schools, clinics, clergy, and state or local agencies that previously had referral authority under the statute.
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes in the provided materials, the measure appears to reflect a strong pro-parental-consent and parental-rights approach. Its framing emphasizes parental control over minors’ health care and limits on government interference, suggesting support from sponsors and likely supporters who favor greater parental involvement. At the same time, the bill’s repeal of confidentiality-related provisions and its restrictions on contraceptive referrals indicate a more controversial posture on adolescent access to certain health services.
The main points of contention are likely to center on the balance between parental rights and minors’ access to confidential health care. Opponents may object to repealing the venereal-disease and substance-related treatment exceptions, arguing that minors could avoid seeking care if parental consent or notice is required. The changes to contraceptive referral authority may also draw concern from health providers, schools, family planning organizations, and public-health advocates who may view the bill as limiting access to reproductive health information and services. Supporters, by contrast, are likely to emphasize parental authority, family decision-making, and protection against unauthorized medical treatment of minors.