Expanding the crime of endangering the welfare of a child.
Summary
SB 23 expands New Hampshire’s child endangerment statute, RSA 639:3, by adding several specific acts that would independently constitute endangering the welfare of a child. The bill would make it an offense to tattoo or brand a minor, to place or attempt to place a child for adoption in violation of adoption law, and to solicit a child under 16 to engage in sexual activity for the purpose of creating a visual representation or to engage in sexual penetration. It also adds broader provisions covering conduct that places a child under 18 in danger of serious bodily injury or death, or that actually results in serious bodily injury or death.
The bill also revises penalties. Conduct causing serious bodily injury or death would be a class A felony, conduct under the new serious-danger provision or repeated violations of the general duty-of-care provision would be a class B felony, and other violations would remain misdemeanors. Existing exceptions are preserved, including the religious-practice exemption and the exemption for conduct under RSA 132-A. The bill is set to take effect January 1, 2026.
Impact
SB 23 would broaden the scope of criminal liability under RSA 639:3 by defining additional conduct as child endangerment and by increasing penalties for the most serious harms. It would affect parents, guardians, caregivers, and any other person whose conduct falls within the new prohibited acts, as well as prosecutors, courts, and correctional agencies that would handle any resulting cases. The fiscal note anticipates no direct revenue impact but says state and local expenditures are indeterminable because the bill could affect prosecution, incarceration, probation, and parole costs.
Sentiment
The available vote history suggests the bill was controversial and did not command majority support. On May 1, an OTP motion failed and an ITL motion passed, indicating the chamber initially favored killing the bill rather than advancing it. A later reconsideration vote also failed on May 8, reinforcing that the bill faced sustained opposition. No committee transcript excerpts were provided, so the record here shows opposition in voting outcomes but not detailed debate.
Contention
The main points of contention appear to be the bill’s expansion of criminal liability and the addition of broad new categories of conduct, especially the serious-bodily-injury/death provisions and the adoption-related offense. Supporters likely viewed the measure as strengthening child protection and closing gaps in the child endangerment statute, while opponents appear to have been concerned about overbreadth, criminalization of conduct already covered elsewhere, or the practical consequences of expanding felony exposure. The failed OTP, successful ITL, and failed reconsideration votes indicate that enough legislators objected to the bill’s approach to prevent passage.