## Facts

- A.V.P., age 17, filed a confidential petition in Louisiana juvenile court seeking authorization to obtain an abortion without parental consent under Louisiana’s judicial-bypass procedure.
- A.V.P. was an intelligent, college-bound high-school senior who had been awarded a merit scholarship and was largely self-supporting.
- The juvenile court immediately appointed counsel for A.V.P. and held a hearing on the petition the same day it was filed.
- A.V.P. was the only witness at the juvenile court hearing.
- A.V.P. testified that neither her father nor her boyfriend remained a presence in her life.
- She described her mother as an emotionally unstable alcoholic and said their relationship was strained.
- A.V.P. testified that her mother had thrown A.V.P.’s sister out of the house when the sister became pregnant, and A.V.P. feared a similar reaction if her mother learned of A.V.P.’s pregnancy.
- A.V.P. testified that she researched her options and received counseling from friends and abortion-clinic staff.
- She stated she was not emotionally or financially ready to care for a child, believed the pregnancy would cause her to lose her scholarship, and considered adoption neither practical nor desirable.
- The juvenile court denied the petition.
- A.V.P. appealed to the Louisiana Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, which was required by statute to conduct a de novo hearing within 48 hours; at the appellate hearing, A.V.P. again provided the only testimony.

## Issues

1. Did A.V.P. prove she was sufficiently mature and well-informed to decide to have an abortion without parental consent?
2. If not, did A.V.P. prove that obtaining an abortion without parental involvement was in her best interest?
3. On the statutorily required de novo appeal, did A.V.P.’s testimony satisfy her burden under either statutory ground for bypass?

## Decision

- The Louisiana Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, affirmed the juvenile court’s denial of A.V.P.’s petition for judicial authorization.
- The court found A.V.P. did not carry her burden to prove she was sufficiently mature and well-informed to make the abortion decision without parental consent.
- The court also found A.V.P. did not carry her burden to prove that parental involvement was contrary to her best interest.
- As a result, the court did not grant judicial authorization for an abortion without parental consent.

## Legal Principles

- Under Louisiana’s judicial-bypass framework, a minor seeking an abortion without parental consent must prove either (a) she is sufficiently mature and well-informed to make the decision independently or (b) parental involvement is not in her best interest.
- The burden of proof rests on the minor petitioner.
- On appeal from a juvenile court’s bypass ruling, the court of appeal must conduct an expedited de novo hearing and make its own determination under the statutory standards.
- A court may deny bypass when the record—here consisting only of the minor’s testimony—does not provide enough support for either statutory basis for dispensing with parental consent.

## Conclusion

In *State in Interest of AVP*, a 17-year-old honor student sought a judicial bypass to obtain an abortion without parental consent, testifying about her academic goals, limited family support, and fear of her alcoholic mother’s reaction based on past conduct toward a pregnant sibling. After the juvenile court denied relief, the Louisiana Fifth Circuit held a required de novo hearing and affirmed, concluding that A.V.P.’s uncorroborated testimony did not meet her statutory burden to show either sufficient maturity and being well-informed or that parental involvement was against her best interest.


State in Interest of AVP, 108 So. 3d 1204 (2013)