New Hampshire Supreme Court Rules in Favor of School Counselor Who Helped Teen Obtain Secret Abortion

New Hampshire Supreme CourtCONCORD, N.H. – A high school counselor who lost her job after helping a 15-year-old student secretly abort her unborn child without telling her parents should be reinstated at her job, the New Hampshire Supreme Court ruled on Thursday.

In November 2012, a 15-year-old Farmington High School student—referred to as “Student A” in court documents—approached Demetria McKaig, who was a school counselor at the time. The student, along with her boyfriend, explained that she was pregnant and wanted to abort her unborn child without telling her parents, saying they were “afraid for their safety” should the girl’s parents find out.

McKaig and another school counselor met with the school principal to discuss the situation. The principal said the student should inform her parents about the pregnancy, in accordance with New Hampshire’s Parental Notification Law, which requires pregnant girls under 18 years old to inform their parents before obtaining abortions.

McKraig disagreed, arguing, according to court records, “that Student A had a right to keep the pregnancy confidential.” She then contacted a spokesperson at the ACLU, who described a way to bypass the state’s Parental Notification Law. McKraig passed along this information the pregnant student.

To ensure that the girl’s parents were not informed of the pregnancy, the ACLU jumped into action, filing a petition for a temporary restraining order that prevented the school principal from contacting the student’s parents. The principal complied, and, on December 10, 2012, the student obtained a “judicial bypass order” from the state supreme court that allowed her to kill her baby without telling her parents.

Four months later, the superintendent informed McKaig that she had lost her job at the school, due to the “insubordination, breach of student confidentiality, and neglect of duties” stemming from the incident with Student A. However, McKaig appealed this decision in court, and, last week, after three years of legal proceedings, the New Hampshire Supreme Court ruled in McKaig’s favor.

“We … order that McKaig be reinstated to her former employment,” the court declared in its final opinion, published Thursday. In its 4-1 decision, the court ruled that McKaig’s actions were justifiable and that she was therefore not deserving of job termination.

  • Connect with Christian News

The lone dissenter in the case, Justice Robert J. Lynn, disagreed, saying, “I cannot join the bandwagon of political correctness that provides the only justification for the majority’s decision.”

“Whether the legislature should have created a privilege prohibiting school districts from disclosing to parents communications between a pregnant minor and school counselors concerning the pregnancy or possible termination of the pregnancy is a debatable point,” Lynn wrote in his dissent.

“What is not debatable is that the legislature did not do so; and neither the state board nor this court has the authority to decide this case as if the legislature had enacted such a privilege merely because the board or the majority of the court may believe that the legislature should have done so,” he added. “Yet that, unfortunately, is the upshot of the majority’s decision.”

Become a Christian News Network Supporter...

Dear Reader, has been of benefit and a blessing to you? For many years now, the Lord has seen fit to use this small news outlet as a strong influential resource in keeping Christians informed on current events from a Biblical worldview. Despite Facebook's recent algorithm changes, which has limited our readership, and, as a result, has affected operational revenue, we continue to strive to bring you the news without compromise and to keep Christ in focus. If you have benefited from our news coverage, would you please prayerfully consider becoming a Christian News supporter by clicking here to make a one-time or monthly donation to help keep the truth widely and freely published and distributed? May Christ continue to be exalted through this work!

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
  • Lupe

    The U.S., as we know it, will, soon, cease to exist.

    Woodrow Wilson started to destroy this nation with Federal Reserve Act, The Federal Trade Commission and the League of Nations. All designed to remove sovereignty from all countries.

    We have been slowly indoctrinated to believe that what the government does “for” the people is good and correct and should NOT be questioned.

    B. Hussein, I think, is the “crowning touch” and just might be the last president we will have.

    Nope, not making a prediction, just using the world around us at present and history to pose a theory. It seems obvious to me but I am just one person.

    I do see our freedoms, as designed by the Constitution, being taken by the government, through “legislative” and “legal” process.
    It’s a sad thing.
    The only hope we have is Jesus the Christ. That is not a hope for this life but for the life to come.
    The best of the best was left for us by our Savior: His word and His promise.

  • Josey

    This student parents had a right to know of any medical procedure being done to their child, what if this student had died due to complications? What would the court have to say to these parents then? This is disgraceful and shows no respect to the parents of said child all so they could kill a baby out of convenience and fear. Come Lord Jesus, Come soon.

    • Ambulance Chaser

      Actually, the judicial bypass law says that they DON’T have that right.

    • Cady555

      The legal bypass rules exist for a reason.


    What’s the big deal? It’s just that public school officials conspired to deceive a child parents and help murder a human baby by pulling it into small pieces. It’s just the democrat party doing what they do worse.

    • Ambulance Chaser

      Define “murder”.

      • Greg Trujillo

        You are a complete jerk.

        • andystachura

          And a faceless coward. It’s parents should have snipped this ambulance chasers tongue and chopped off its fingers at birth

          • Ambulance Chaser


        • Ambulance Chaser

          I’m unaware of that definition. Which dictionary did you find it in?

  • Peter Leh

    one reason a minor may get an abortion w/o parental consent is because of abuse or incest. Can anyone give another reason in addition?

    The reason why it can be done is because of terrible men. fix the men you fix the majority of the reasons for abortion.

    • AndrewDowling

      Reproductive issues do not concern gay men at all.

      • Peter Leh

        indeed. What has that do do with the story?

    • andystachura

      Most sexist comment I’ve seen here yet. What a moron

      • Peter Leh

        sexist? Please elaborate calling out abusive men and incest as sexist?

  • Guest

    This was decided on procedural grounds – the counselor was dismissed without following the rules such dismissals require and that is why her dismissal was reversed.

    The school disctrict could just redismiss her following their own rules about such dismissals and she would then actually be dismissed.

    It went to the Supreme Court because the school disctrict didn’t follow their own rules, what the topic was about wasn’t the issue before the court.

  • Nidalap

    Hmph! This was nothing! Imagine how this counselor would have suffered had she directed the teen to a pregnancy center instead…

  • Cady555

    The teacher told the truth about the laws governing abortion. The student followed the law to get court approval for an abortion without parental notification. School employees respected student confidentiality. Everyone followed the rules.

    Christian prejudice about a personal medical decision has no bearing on the situation.

    • andystachura

      Your flat out wrong. Yes it does!

      • Ambulance Chaser

        Apparently not, hence, the way the court decision came down.

  • jael2

    Whether a person is pro-abortion or anti-abortion this ruling should concern all parents.
    When you abrogate parental rights in favor of teachers, counselors, and the courts playing nanny, it’s a very slippery slope. Let me revise slippery slope to an avalanche. Our kids belong to us not the state.

    • Cady555

      jael2 said “Our kids belong to us not the state.”

      Well there’s your problem.

      No. No. And again No.

      I am pleased to inform you that the ownership of human beings has gone the way of the dodo bird. Your children belong to themselves. They are not property. They do not belong to you.

      As parents, we have rights to make decisions for our children, but these rights are not absolute. In this case, via a legal process, a person was permitted to make her own decision without parental input. Apparently, the court found there was evidence to support her fear of her parents’ reaction.

      The legal process was followed here.

  • Grace Kim Kwon

    Abortion is murder. At least the parents should be notified. Public schools work for some bad agenda. Children need Christian education to hear the life-saving Gospel message and also learn the basic morality.

  • disqus_O2BUmbLecp

    NH State law requires schools to inform parents about pregnant students/daughters who wanna seek an abortion. Aren’t the schools n courts required to follow State laws.? Instead, the NH courts n ACLU conspired to circumvent a State law = liberals r lawless people.
    MATT.7:23 = 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

    • Ambulance Chaser

      Cite the law, please.

      • disqus_O2BUmbLecp

        QUOTING from the article: …….” The principal said the student should inform her parents about the pregnancy, in accordance with New Hampshire’s Parental Notification Law, which requires pregnant girls under 18 years old to inform their parents before obtaining abortions. “

        • Ambulance Chaser

          So, you’re just going to ignore the part allowing for a judicial bypass, then?

          • disqus_O2BUmbLecp

            In this case, this teen couple who were minors n students were very irresponsible to get the girl pregnant. The girl’s parents should hv been informed/notified as per the Law so that the appropriate disciplinary action can be taken by the girl’s parents against the boy n the girl, after the abortion. Also, the parents might hv needed to be counseled on proper parenting.
            …….Instead, the liberal ACLU has abetted a cover-up of this teen pregnancy problem = the girl’s parents r clueless about the problem.
            If every female student n minor who got irresponsibly pregnant were to be abetted by the liberal ACLU to easily get judicial bypasses for this Law, the problem of teen pregnancies will never be reduced.

            Hence, the liberals r lawless people who destroy societies.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            You’re all over the map. Is it or is it not legal to get a judicial bypass?

          • disqus_O2BUmbLecp

            Is it or is it not legal for parents to be notified when their minor-daughter wanna secretly get an abortion.?
            IOW, should such a minor-daughter be allowed to legally hide her pregnancy from her parents with a judicial bypass.?

          • Ambulance Chaser

            “Is it or is it not legal for parents to be notified when their minor-daughter wanna secretly get an abortion?”

            If by “legal,” you mean “required,” then the answer is yes, unless she gets a judicial bypass.

            “IOW, should such a minor-daughter be allowed to legally hide her pregnancy from her parents with a judicial bypass?”

            I’m not interested in discussing what should be. Only what is. And as I pointed out to you, judicial bypasses are a legal method by which minors can have abortions without informing their parents.