Transcript Highlights:

• ><03:32:31.600> allow<03:32:31.920> a<03:32:32.040> guardian<03:32:32.359> adem
• the authority to allow a guardian adem the authority to allow a guardian adem to<03:32:33.000>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Children and Family Law Committee opened a hearing on House Bill 285, which would add language to the parental rights and responsibilities statute directing judges to consider known mental health or medical conditions that could affect parenting. Representative Ball, the bill’s sponsor, said the intent was not to require disclosure of private records, but to give judges a reminder to ask whether anything in a parent’s condition could interfere with parenting and to help ensure children’s safety and best interests, especially in high-conflict or pro se family court cases. He said the proposal was meant as a guardrail and not as a way to reduce parenting time or take children from parents. Committee members questioned whether the existing best-interest factors already cover parenting ability, whether the new language could invite stigma or weaponization in custody disputes, and whether judges already have authority to ask these questions. Ball responded that judges often do not ask, that family court can be difficult for unrepresented parties, and that the language would simply make the issue explicit. He also said he would be open to amendments, including language that more directly instructs judges to ask the question. One member raised concerns about whether the bill should say judges “shall” ask rather than “may,” and Ball said he was willing to work with the committee on wording. Sarah Horn, a NAMI New Hampshire board member and parent, testified in opposition. She described her own history with OCD, ADD, PTSD, hospitalization, and recovery, and said mental illness had not harmed her ability to parent; she warned the bill could increase stigma and discourage people from seeking treatment. In response, Ball said her testimony was part of why he had considered an amendment to include physical health as well, so the bill would not single out mental health. The hearing ended without a vote in the transcript provided.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee began by announcing that afternoon hearings, including House Bill 283, would be moved to Representatives Hall because of expected public interest. It then took up House Bill 671, which would establish a kindergarten literacy readiness program. The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Mark Pearson, described the measure as a way to close gaps in early reading readiness and said it was intended as a first step, with only a placeholder appropriation while details are developed. He framed it as a targeted effort to help children who are not entering first grade ready to read. Testimony on HB 671 was largely supportive. Representatives asked about the bill’s structure, whether a specific program had been identified, how it would interact with play-based learning, and why the provider was limited to a registered nonprofit. Waterford.org representatives Teresa Rosenberger and Rob Riley testified in support, describing Waterford Upstart as a home-based, evidence-based early learning program already used in New Hampshire. They said the program provides adaptive instruction, family coaching, and technology support, including computers, tablets, internet access, and translation services in more than 100 languages. They also said the model has been successful in New Hampshire, including a Nashua pilot and later statewide efforts, and that similar legislation has existed in other states. Rep. Jonah Wheeler also spoke in support of the bill. The chair then closed the hearing on HB 671. After a fiscal note for HB 671 was distributed, the committee moved to House Bill 781, which would require school districts to adopt policies for a cell phone-free education and includes an appropriation. The transcript cuts off as Rep. Litchfield was introduced to testify on that bill, so no testimony, debate, or vote on HB 781 is included in the excerpt.