SB 948: relating to parental rights
Sponsor: Rick Brattin
OPPOSE
Oppose due to opt-out data language and broad, expensive enforcement structure.
SB 948 is a parental-rights bill with several strong instincts. It would create a new statewide parental-rights standard, require the government to meet a compelling-interest / least-restrictive-means test before interfering, enumerate specific parental rights in education and health care, and create a cause of action for parents who believe those rights were violated . It would also repeal the current language that lets certain minors consent on their own to treatment for venereal disease and drug or substance abuse . But under our criteria, the bill still falls short because its student-data language is opt-out, not opt-in, and the enforcement section is broad enough that the fiscal note projects more than $1 million in annual General Revenue cost plus unknown additional litigation exposure .
What Does This Bill Do?
- Fundamental Parental Rights Declared: This section says a parent has a fundamental liberty interest in the care, custody, and control of a child, including upbringing, education, health care, and mental health, free from government interference, imposing a compelling-interest / least-restrictive-means test on government restrictions .
- Student Data Defect (Opt-Out): It lets a parent opt the child out of school-district personal analysis, evaluation, survey, or data collection for the statewide longitudinal student data system. Because the structure is opt-out rather than affirmative opt-in, it fails the Act for Missouri privacy rule .
- Repeal of Certain Minor Self-Consent Authority: The bill removes venereal disease and drug/substance abuse from current minor self-consent language, restoring some parental control, though it notably leaves pregnancy self-consent intact .
Constitutional or Critical Context
The liberty-protecting purpose of SB 948 is within the proper role of government, attempting to restrain the state by codifying parental rights and limiting interference . However, the bill expands government in one important practical sense: it creates a broad litigation pathway against government entities . It gives parents a legal claim or defense with declaratory relief, injunctions, compensatory damages, and attorneys' fees . Due to this structure, the Department of Social Services anticipates 7 new FTE dedicated strictly to litigation work, shifting conflict resolution into expensive court battles rather than clean statutory safeguards .
Red Flags & Recommended Amendments
Privacy / Consent Problem - student data is still opt-out
This is the cleanest reason to oppose under our current criteria. The bill does not require affirmative opt-in consent before school-related data collection; it only gives a right to opt out.
Open-ended litigation engine
Parents may bring claims or defenses and seek declaratory relief, injunctions, compensatory damages, and attorneys' fees. The fiscal note ties that directly to more than $1 million in annual General Revenue costs and unknown broader litigation exposure due to vague language.
Act for Missouri Recommendation:
Act for Missouri OPPOSES SB 948 as introduced . The bill contains several strong pro-parent provisions and clearly seeks to push back against government interference . But under our criteria, the opt-out student-data language is a disqualifying privacy flaw, and the enforcement mechanism is broad enough to create serious recurring taxpayer cost and uncertain downstream litigation . With major amendments—especially converting the data language to true opt-in—it could become much more supportable .