SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Parental Rights and
Responsibilities Act of 1995’’.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds that—
(1) the Supreme Court has regarded the right
of parents to direct the upbringing of their children
as a fundamental right implicit in the concept of or-
dered liberty within the 14th amendment to the
Constitution of the United States, as specified in
Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923) and Pierce
v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 (1925);
(2) the role of parents in the raising and
rearing of their children is of inestimable value and
deserving of both praise and protection by all levels
of government;
(3) the tradition of western civilization recog-
nizes that parents have the responsibility to love,
nurture, train, and protect their children;
(4) some decisions of Federal and State courts
have treated the right of parents not as a fundamen-
tal right but as a nonfundamental right, resulting in
an improper standard of judicial review being ap-
plied to government conduct that adversely affects
parental rights and prerogatives;
(5) parents face increasing intrusions into their
legitimate decisions and prerogatives by government
agencies in situations that do not involve traditional
understandings of abuse or neglect but simply are a
conflict of parenting philosophies;
(6) governments should not interfere in the de-
cisions and actions of parents without compelling
justification; and
(7) the traditional 4-step process used by courts
to evaluate cases concerning the right of parents de-
scribed in paragraph (1) appropriately balances the
interests of parents, children, and government.
(b) PURPOSES.—The purposes of this Act are—
(1) to protect the right of parents to direct the
upbringing of their children as a fundamental right;
(2) to protect children from abuse and neglect
as the terms have been traditionally defined and ap-
plied in statutory law, such protection being a com-
pelling government interest;
(3) while protecting the rights of parents, to ac-
knowledge that the rights involve responsibilities and
specifically that parents have the responsibility to
see that their children are educated, for the purposes
of literacy and self-sufficiency, as specified by the
Supreme Court in Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205
(1972);
(4) to preserve the common law tradition that
allows parental choices to prevail in a health care de-
cision for a child unless, by neglect or refusal, the
parental decision will result in danger to the child’s
life or result in serious physical injury of the child;
(5) to fix a standard of judicial review for pa-
rental rights, leaving to the courts the application of
the rights in particular cases based on the facts of
the cases and law as applied to the facts; and
(6) to reestablish a 4-step process to evaluate
cases concerning the right of parents described in
paragraph (1) that—
(A) requires a parent to initially dem-
onstrate that—
(i) the action in question arises from
the right of the parent to direct the up-
bringing of a child; and
(ii) a government has interfered with
or usurped the right; and
(B) shifts the burdens of production and
persuasion to the government to demonstrate
that—
(i) the interference or usurpation is
essential to accomplish a compelling gov-
ernmental interest; and
(ii) the method of intervention or
usurpation used by the government is the
least restrictive means of accomplishing
the compelling interest.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
As used in this Act:
(1) APPROPRIATE EVIDENCE.—The term ‘‘ap-
propriate evidence’’ means—
(A) for a case in which a government seeks
a temporary or preliminary action or order, ex-
cept cases which terminate parental custody or
visitation, evidence that demonstrates probable
cause; and
(B) for a case in which the government
seeks a final action or order, or in which it
seeks to terminate parental custody or visita-
tion, clear and convincing evidence.
(2) CHILD.—The term ‘‘child’’ has the meaning
provided by State law.
(3) PARENT.—The term ‘‘parent’’ has the
meaning provided by State law.
(4) RIGHT OF A PARENT TO DIRECT THE UP-
BRINGING OF A CHILD.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘‘right of a
parent to direct the upbringing of a child’’ in-
cludes, but is not limited to a right of a parent
regarding—
(i) directing or providing for the edu-
cation of the child;
(ii) making a health care decision for
the child, except as provided in subpara-
graph (B);
(iii) disciplining the child, including
reasonable corporal discipline, except as
provided in subparagraph (C); and
(iv) directing or providing for the reli-
gious teaching of the child.
(B) NO APPLICATION TO PARENTAL DECI-
SIONS ON HEALTH CARE.—The term ‘‘right of
a parent to direct the upbringing of a child’’
shall not include a right of a parent to make a
decision on health care for the child that, by ne-
glect or refusal, will result in danger to the life
of the child or in serious physical injury to the
child.
(C) NO APPLICATION TO ABUSE AND NE-
GLECT.—The term ‘‘right of a parent to direct
the upbringing of a child’’ shall not include a
right of a parent to act or refrain from acting
in a manner that constitutes abuse or neglect of
a child, as the terms have traditionally been de-
fined.
(5) STATE.—The term ‘‘State’’ includes the
District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, and each territory and possession of the Unit-
ed States.
SEC. 4. PROHIBITION ON INTERFERING WITH OR USURP-
ING RIGHTS OF PARENTS.
No Federal, State, or local government, or any offi-
cial of such a government acting under color of law, shall
interfere with or usurp the right of a parent to direct the
upbringing of the child of the parent.
SEC. 5. STRICT SCRUTINY.
No exception to section 4 shall be permitted, unless
the government or official is able to demonstrate, by ap-
propriate evidence, that the interference or usurpation is
essential to accomplish a compelling governmental interest
and is narrowly drawn or applied in a manner that is the
least restrictive means of accomplishing the compelling in-
terest.