Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Parental Notification re: Abortion

Abortion Parental Notification

  • Please log in to reply
78 replies to this topic

#41 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 9,215 posts

Posted 04 October 2012 - 07:37 PM

^ Parental consent to get a driver's license I assume you mean (and of course, to drive the parent's car, since they have ownership). But once they have the license they can drive the car of any owner, with update insurance, that they get permission from. (sorry, just me over analyzing things :) I have a tendency you may have notice).

And, nope, not a parent.

My mom didn't even know I didn't have friends during much of grade school. (though I did have seven different grade schools). And when my family was having a general conversation it came up, from me. It wasn't an "oh woe" me situation, just talking. My mom had this strange look (regret? sadness? guilt? I dunno) over her face and said something along the lines of that she didn't know. I obviously didn't tell her at the time (why I didn't I can't specifically recall, I didn't recall keeping it from her either.... I was just an introverted kid who didn't obviously think to talk about my school-life much with her).

I imagine that look is why you think every parent should know. Even if they can't change what happened, what is happening, or what is going to happen, most good parents want to know. So they can talk to their kid about it, help them process it, and if possible/necessary, help them sort it, with various levels of contribution. And if that is not possible, to at least be a shoulder to cry on (though that really falls under the processing part). Even if my mother couldn't change anything, she would have liked to know.

I am just wondering the the notification law isn't an interference in the child-parent relationship as is. Of course, one could easily argue of course it is, in the favour of the parents, which need all the tools and help they can get these days :) And since an abortion (hopefully!) is not something a teen is doing themselves, unlike a million other things, good or bad, they may do autonomously, and they are getting a facility and staff approved by either the government and/or a medical association or something similar, the government can't remove itself from the relationship and must make a decision either way. Though the lack of notification law doesn't *stop* a teenager from telling their parents.

Unlike say the HIV consent laws here in Canada. Tomorrow morning the Canadian Supreme court is going to make a decision regarding a law that says that a person, who is HIV positive and knows it, must reveal that status to their potential sexual partners. That is getting too much into people's bedrooms for me. Yes, it is the only moral thing to do, but besides giving people a false sense of security (and perhaps discouraging some from testing), there shouldn't be a law about it.

I am not saying they are the same situation. I just came across that news story today (didn't know this was going down) and my brain put them in the same sphere of government in very private situations.

So, if I understand your position, you are not as concerned about problems notification may cause (I am not talking about child abuse victims, but other things, such as teens ending up with riskier abortions from either back alley/home abortions, or delays due to parental fears, judicial waiver, being near 18, etc), as you are with the problems lack of notification may cause (the undermining of parental governance and guidance of their teenagers and the many problems that may cause). Maybe it is just because the problems with notification are such much more measurable that it is easier to swallow. Maybe I'll join you some day :) And I believe you feel that various contraceptive should be available to teens without notification/consent. STI tests, and results, since it is a medical condition, potentially, I assume you feel the parents should get notified as well. Should include even negative results, make the parents both relieved and shocked at the same time! :)

I think part of it is I just want laws to make some sense. Like I said before, the government is allowing teens to consent to sex without parental input (in some places, where the law is less than 18). Of course, how does one stop it? Some may think it is bad idea to make a law to put the age of consent up to 18, even with close-in-age exceptions. So, yes, if I am probably not discussing this in a manner you'd appreciate. I don't know if I can, I get stuck up on details and analysis sometimes. Just sometimes ;) Though near the top of this post I tried! :) For my part, I have really appreciated this discussion, I haven't had one like this on EI for a long long time. Maybe because I haven't had the time, maybe because U.S. politics stuff dominate, I dunno. But maybe you can console yourself that someone got something out of this ;) :)

Bad Wolf (I had to look up your current handle, I instinctively put an old one there initially... still, after all this time! :) ) the age of consent is 18 in California? How does the law treat contraceptive, solely use for contraceptive, for teenagers then? It would seem odd that a teenager could still get contraceptive, solely for that purpose, if it is to support a criminal act. And anyone who is prescribing contraceptive should know the purpose they are prescribing it for. Of course, sometimes it has multiple purposes.

Edited to add: I only briefly touched upon teenage development and what not. I don't think I have made myself much clear on the topic. It is sort of a side topic, but connected, tenuously or otherwise. Some say adolescence is a modern invention. Though obviously there has always been a time between the onset of puberty, and the end of physical growth, there hasn't always been this extended childhood. Not saying it is manageable, or desirable in today's society, but sometimes it seems like the twenty-somethings seem more like teenagers now-a-days. And I've read of parents catering to their adult children. Writing resumes, and other things. I am not saying parents show let their teenage children do whatever they like, I just wonder how useful this extended childhood is. I think it was QT that said once, talking about infants/toddlers, that a seeming development delay could be sign of unintentional parental interference in such (for example, a child may not learn to talk at an average developmental age because all their wants were constantly available and given). I think that can happen at any stage of development. Of course, sex is a big thing, and kids should definitely talk about it to an adult they can trust. I was trying to talking about teenage development in general, which is going to drift from their parents as the central authority in their lives. Completely natural. Not that I am romantizing (sp?) old times. I mean you made one bad decision back then and you were stuck with it for life (like marriage partners). And often unwed teenagers still lived at home and, at least in the home, under parent governance. As far as I can tell, they had more responsibilities, but not likely autonomy.

Of course, notification laws may not make one whit of difference. In most of the best functional families the kids will probably talk to their parents without this law. In dysfunctional (but not abusive) families, with a notification law, there might be a blow up argument, or nothing said at all... Little may change, or a lot may change, and the information is out there. What harm is there in that I suppose? And in families in-between, something in-between will happen.

Edited by sierraleone, 04 October 2012 - 08:37 PM.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#42 Lin731

Lin731
  • Islander
  • 4,126 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 08:47 AM

For the record, I'm a parent (I have a son and a daughter). As a parent, I would want to be notified because this is a medical procedure and it carries risks, both emotionally and physically. Not to mention the life altering nature of the options. I have a 2 year old grand son that I love beyond words but my son not being married has added a lot of concerns for us. Stability is so important for kids. Single parents have so many issues that married couples don't. Financially speaking and the cost of child care alone is huge. My husband and I anchor my little guy in many ways. We're a constant, stable part of his life. No boyfriends or girlfriends coming and going. No changing schedules and different parenting styles as is the case with his parents. If he needs something and they can't afford it, we take care of it. I wouldn't trade that lil guy for anything in the world but these issues are part and parcel of this single parent age we live in. Connor has us, how many little ones don't have that?  I'll be honest here, being pro choice doesn't change my natural desire to want my kids to keep any children they'd create and that is my concern here on notification. Legally I might not be able to impose my wishes but I surely CAN make my view known and possibly tilt the decision in my direction. You don't have to be an abusive parent to impact their decisions in ways that longterm, may not be the best for them. Fortunately that was not an issue with Connor, my son was grown and he wanted to be a parent. My daughter, who IS married has no kids yet but likewise, she wants to be a parent but what if they didn't? I worry about the influence my feelings could have had on their decisions.
Posted Image
Posted Image

#43 Mikoto

Mikoto

    Rejected on all levels.

  • Islander
  • 9,304 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 09:41 AM

Quote

Legally I might not be able to impose my wishes but I surely CAN make my view known and possibly tilt the decision in my direction. You don't have to be an abusive parent to impact their decisions in ways that longterm, may not be the best for them.

And there in Lin's post touches on what bothers me about parental notification. Not talking about Lin personally but her post highlights the issue nicely.

A parent who strongly wants their teenage daughter to keep the baby and is actively trying to influence the teen to do so. What comes to mind is that the teenager possibly is probably neither emotionally nor mentally ready for a baby. (Perhaps physically if the teenager is on the 13-14 year old end of the scale.) A teenager by and large can't look after herself fully independantly right? How then are they ready to look after a child themselves if they aren't fully grown? It can look to some like the parent is putting his/her desires for a grandchild above anything else.

Of course my own perspective might be tainted as my mother is one of those parents who wants a grandchild from me so badly and if I ever did get pregnant she would very heavily work to influence my decision into keeping it. Even if my very nature didn't exclude me from being a parent, I'm single and I have a poorly paid job. In my eyes I'm financially unfit to rear a child properly. I'd end up foisting the baby on my parents from 9-5 five days a week so they'd practically be rearing it for me. (Oh yeah, I'm much older than a teenager. LOL that was a good decade or so ago for me.)

Edited by Mikoto, 06 October 2012 - 09:42 AM.

Rejected and gone.

#44 Cait

Cait

    Democracy Dies in Darkness

  • Moderator
  • 10,810 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 10:01 AM

Good response Miko, but let me add something.  It's a parent's job to influence his or her children.  That's the whole point of parenting whether we like it or not.  It all boils down to who you want to influence your kids, not whether or not they will be influenced.  Do you want the state influencing them, or parents?  Because that is the choice we're really talking about here.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.

Source:
http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html


#45 Nonny

Nonny

    Scourge of Pretentious Bad Latin

  • Islander
  • 31,142 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 10:37 AM

My parents made a decision for me that I tried to fight.  The college counselor tricked them into making me apply to a college that was not Ohio State, and made me apply early decision.  It was such a disaster that I walked away from a four year scholarship, with no chance of a redo, and found out later that she had  promised "three times the scholarship money" without bothering to tell them that the much smaller OSU scholarship would have been a full ride, while the crappy seven sisters wasn't.

And, of course, the crappy seven sisters school had nothing I wanted to study anyway.  OSU has one of the finest linguistics departments in the country, then and now.

Over the years, Mom called me now and then, in tears, to apologize for blighting my future.  I always forgave her.  I hope the college counselor is rotting in hell, even if I don't believe in hell.

So much for parental influence.
Posted Image


The once and future Nonny

"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank, give a man a bank and he can rob the world." Can anyone tell me who I am quoting?  I found this with no attribution.

Fatal miscarriages are forever.

Stupid is stupid, this I believe. And ignorance is the worst kind of stupid, since ignorance is a choice.  Suzanne Brockmann

All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings. Diderot

#46 Nonny

Nonny

    Scourge of Pretentious Bad Latin

  • Islander
  • 31,142 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 10:57 AM

Should parents who are influenced by crap like this be allowed to pass it along to their innocent children?  I grew up Catholic, and, sure, I laughed during the first minute, but now I'm really concerned:

http://www.youtube.c...&v=auv6c0-FsjU#!
Posted Image


The once and future Nonny

"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank, give a man a bank and he can rob the world." Can anyone tell me who I am quoting?  I found this with no attribution.

Fatal miscarriages are forever.

Stupid is stupid, this I believe. And ignorance is the worst kind of stupid, since ignorance is a choice.  Suzanne Brockmann

All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings. Diderot

#47 Cait

Cait

    Democracy Dies in Darkness

  • Moderator
  • 10,810 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 11:44 AM

View PostNonny, on 06 October 2012 - 10:37 AM, said:

My parents made a decision for me that I tried to fight.  The college counselor tricked them into making me apply to a college that was not Ohio State, and made me apply early decision.  It was such a disaster that I walked away from a four year scholarship, with no chance of a redo, and found out later that she had  promised "three times the scholarship money" without bothering to tell them that the much smaller OSU scholarship would have been a full ride, while the crappy seven sisters wasn't.

And, of course, the crappy seven sisters school had nothing I wanted to study anyway.  OSU has one of the finest linguistics departments in the country, then and now.

Over the years, Mom called me now and then, in tears, to apologize for blighting my future.  I always forgave her.  I hope the college counselor is rotting in hell, even if I don't believe in hell.

So much for parental influence.

Would it have been better to have the State tell you where to go to college and what scholarship you were going to take?  That's the issue.  It's between the state and parents.  It's not about parents making mistakes, because ALL parents make mistakes.  Children make even more.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.

Source:
http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html


#48 Cait

Cait

    Democracy Dies in Darkness

  • Moderator
  • 10,810 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 12:04 PM

View PostNonny, on 06 October 2012 - 10:57 AM, said:

Should parents who are influenced by crap like this be allowed to pass it along to their innocent children?  I grew up Catholic, and, sure, I laughed during the first minute, but now I'm really concerned:

http://www.youtube.c...&v=auv6c0-FsjU#!

Nonny, I understand your concerns.  I really do. But, are you aware of the fact that you are actually arguing that parents have no influence.  No control.  No responsibility. That leaves only the State, and that's been my argument all along.  The State is making parents nothing more than scapegoats and babysitters.

And, I'm here to tell you I had a terrible childhood. I mean terrible.  It was full of abandonment and abuse.  And, I'd still rather have my parents as opposed to the State and Foster Care or some institution.  I was raised a Mormon and I was a true believer as a child and early teen, but I survived and found my own spirituality.  I'd still rather be raised a Mormon than with no beliefs at all and no community to belong to, just the State and some Case Worker to drop by every 3 months.

Many of you present the worst case scenario and side with the teen, but look at the worst case scenario you are arguing for.  If parents aren't responsible, then who is?  You take parents out of the equation and who is left?  The State.  You want that as an alternative to parents?  Really?  You;'d rather have the State influencing kids?

Arguing that parents have an influence and that is bad bad bad, is circular logic.  Everything in life, every person we meet, all of it has an influence--both good and bad.  We cannot legislate out parental mistakes, or the bad results of living and making choices.  That's what FREEDOM is people.  It's about making choices and living with the consequences--good and bad.  It's also about parents making those choices until their kids are old enough to do it for themselves and be on their own--i.e. Adults.

Putting legislators in control of families  and letting the state make parental decisions [if parents have not had their rights taken away by courts] is putting kids at greater risk than any influence a parent might have or ever would have [imo].

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.

Source:
http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html


#49 Nonny

Nonny

    Scourge of Pretentious Bad Latin

  • Islander
  • 31,142 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 12:11 PM

View PostCait, on 06 October 2012 - 11:44 AM, said:

View PostNonny, on 06 October 2012 - 10:37 AM, said:

My parents made a decision for me that I tried to fight.  The college counselor tricked them into making me apply to a college that was not Ohio State, and made me apply early decision.  It was such a disaster that I walked away from a four year scholarship, with no chance of a redo, and found out later that she had  promised "three times the scholarship money" without bothering to tell them that the much smaller OSU scholarship would have been a full ride, while the crappy seven sisters wasn't.

And, of course, the crappy seven sisters school had nothing I wanted to study anyway.  OSU has one of the finest linguistics departments in the country, then and now.

Over the years, Mom called me now and then, in tears, to apologize for blighting my future.  I always forgave her.  I hope the college counselor is rotting in hell, even if I don't believe in hell.

So much for parental influence.

Would it have been better to have the State tell you where to go to college and what scholarship you were going to take?  That's the issue.  It's between the state and parents.  It's not about parents making mistakes, because ALL parents make mistakes.  Children make even more.

Of course!   The State of Ohio would have sent me to Ohio State on a full ride academic scholarship and I would have gone on for a PhD.  My parents didn't just make a mistake, they made a life changing, life damaging mistake because they didn't have all the information.

Funny, but I knew at the age of 15 what I wanted to do with my life, and it wasn't a mistake.
Posted Image


The once and future Nonny

"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank, give a man a bank and he can rob the world." Can anyone tell me who I am quoting?  I found this with no attribution.

Fatal miscarriages are forever.

Stupid is stupid, this I believe. And ignorance is the worst kind of stupid, since ignorance is a choice.  Suzanne Brockmann

All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings. Diderot

#50 Nonny

Nonny

    Scourge of Pretentious Bad Latin

  • Islander
  • 31,142 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 12:14 PM

View PostCait, on 06 October 2012 - 12:04 PM, said:

View PostNonny, on 06 October 2012 - 10:57 AM, said:

Should parents who are influenced by crap like this be allowed to pass it along to their innocent children?  I grew up Catholic, and, sure, I laughed during the first minute, but now I'm really concerned:

http://www.youtube.c...&v=auv6c0-FsjU#!

Nonny, I understand your concerns.  I really do. But, are you aware of the fact that you are actually arguing that parents have no influence.  No control.  No responsibility. That leaves only the State, and that's been my argument all along.  The State is making parents nothing more than scapegoats and babysitters.

And, I'm here to tell you I had a terrible childhood. I mean terrible.  It was full of abandonment and abuse.  And, I'd still rather have my parents as opposed to the State and Foster Care or some institution.  I was raised a Mormon and I was a true believer as a child and early teen, but I survived and found my own spirituality.  I'd still rather be raised a Mormon than with no beliefs at all and no community to belong to, just the State and some Case Worker to drop by every 3 months.

Many of you present the worst case scenario and side with the teen, but look at the worst case scenario you are arguing for.  If parents aren't responsible, then who is?  You take parents out of the equation and who is left?  The State.  You want that as an alternative to parents?  Really?  You;'d rather have the State influencing kids?

Arguing that parents have an influence and that is bad bad bad, is circular logic.  Everything in life, every person we meet, all of it has an influence--both good and bad.  We cannot legislate out parental mistakes, or the bad results of living and making choices.  That's what FREEDOM is people.  It's about making choices and living with the consequences--good and bad.  It's also about parents making those choices until their kids are old enough to do it for themselves and be on their own--i.e. Adults.

Putting legislators in control of families  and letting the state make parental decisions [if parents have not had their rights taken away by courts] is putting kids at greater risk than any influence a parent might have or ever would have [imo].

Are you supporting the lies in the video I posted?

Quote

But, are you aware of the fact that you are actually arguing that parents have no influence.  No control.  No responsibility.

I am doing no such thing.
Posted Image


The once and future Nonny

"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank, give a man a bank and he can rob the world." Can anyone tell me who I am quoting?  I found this with no attribution.

Fatal miscarriages are forever.

Stupid is stupid, this I believe. And ignorance is the worst kind of stupid, since ignorance is a choice.  Suzanne Brockmann

All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings. Diderot

#51 Nonny

Nonny

    Scourge of Pretentious Bad Latin

  • Islander
  • 31,142 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 12:18 PM

This misrepresentation of what I believe and what I have posted is upsetting me more than an attack from someone who actually dislikes me.  I hope I have the good sense to stay out of this thread.
Posted Image


The once and future Nonny

"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank, give a man a bank and he can rob the world." Can anyone tell me who I am quoting?  I found this with no attribution.

Fatal miscarriages are forever.

Stupid is stupid, this I believe. And ignorance is the worst kind of stupid, since ignorance is a choice.  Suzanne Brockmann

All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings. Diderot

#52 Lin731

Lin731
  • Islander
  • 4,126 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 01:21 PM

Quote

Good response Miko, but let me add something.  It's a parent's job to influence his or her children.  That's the whole point of parenting whether we like it or not.  It all boils down to who you want to influence your kids, not whether or not they will be influenced.  Do you want the state influencing them, or parents?  Because that is the choice we're really talking about here.

I totally get where you're coming from and in many ways I DO share your POV. I think in many ways parents are marginalized. Look at school situations where our kids were educated about their "rights" (without being taught any sense of responsibility that goes with those rights) and often told that any discipline borders on abuse. Then the schools complain that the kids are out of control. Well gee, I wonder WHY.

My issue though is would I really be "parenting" or "grandparenting". My job is to look out for the best interests of my kids but if I am pushing them to have kids they can't afford, aren't mature enough to raise etc...am I really looking out for their interests or my potential grandchilds? See in my case, my kids have always known I'd step up and help in any way I can but I have seen other parents push hard to have that grandbaby because they want to be a grandparent without realising that their pressure has led to huge problems for their child who isn't really financially or emotionally able to raise that child. Then they're (the grandparents) complaining about how much help their kid needs to care for the baby.

I guess where we differ is mainly in that I don't see the government as having "influence". They don't have a dog in that fight, ya know? They aren't pressuring the kid in one direction or another where family definately will push for a particular outcome. Honestly I have seen some families torn up because the child did have an abortion and the parents simply couldn't or wouldn't forgive them for aborting their grandchild.






Quote


Posted Image
Posted Image

#53 Bad Wolf

Bad Wolf

    Luck is when opportunity meets preparation

  • Islander
  • 38,881 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 01:29 PM

Legislating abortion includes legislating a requirement for parental notification or consent.
Posted Image

#54 Bad Wolf

Bad Wolf

    Luck is when opportunity meets preparation

  • Islander
  • 38,881 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 01:31 PM

I think that history demonstrates that government does have a dog in the fight, or at least many people in government think they do or think that they should, which is why they try to legislate things that are really none of their business.
Posted Image

#55 Cait

Cait

    Democracy Dies in Darkness

  • Moderator
  • 10,810 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 02:17 PM

View PostNonny, on 06 October 2012 - 12:18 PM, said:

This misrepresentation of what I believe and what I have posted is upsetting me more than an attack from someone who actually dislikes me.  I hope I have the good sense to stay out of this thread.

FTR, I was arguing the other extreme of what I see is the State taking over for parents.  I never said anyone suggested in their arguments what I proposed as the other extreme.  I was pointing out where some arguments might/would ultimately take us.  If that is upsetting to you Nonny, I apologize   But I never said you thought what I said.  I asked if you knew where your argument could take us. Sometimes, no, many times, people do not think about the long view.  I wondered if people were looking at the long view on my side of the argument.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.

Source:
http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html


#56 Nikcara

Nikcara

    confused little imp

  • Islander
  • 3,500 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 02:20 PM

While I'm reading this, I can't help but think that even if there is no parental notification, the government isn't really taking away a parent's right to parent.  

For me at least, when I was growing up what was legal and what wasn't never really affected how I reacted to my parents.  Logically, I endured plenty of punishments that would be illegal, yet I never reported a single one.  Because they were my parents.  But the time I was a teenager my mom had divorced my first stepfather (the abusive jerk I feared for most of my childhood) and fear gave way to anger...a whole LOT of anger...but again, what as legal and what wasn't never really entered my brain, aside from counting down until I turned 18 and could legally leave.  I suspect that I'm not alone in my response - most teenagers will react based on the way they were raised, not on what the law states.  Most of the ones that will seriously consider what the law will or will not do are the ones that already have a damaged relationship with their parents.

The other part (for me at least) is that by the time a kid is a teenager, they're already on the way to being adults.  Autonomy over their own bodies is one of the first rights/responsibilities they should be granted.  Perhaps kids on the younger end of the scale (like those who get pregnant under the age of 13 or 14) should still have their parents notified, but I've always disliked the idea that a teenager has no control over their own life until they hit 18 and then suddenly they have all the control (legally).  

The last issue I'm going to bring up is safety.  A first trimester abortion is incredibly safe, no cutting required (it's typically a pill, though aspiration abortions may also be performed).  If you're going to argue a kid dying on a surgery table somewhere, you're already talking about a later term abortion (2nd or 3rd trimester).  Even second trimester abortions are generally quite safe when done by an actual doctor (certainly safer than childbirth).  Generally the biggest risk comes from 3rd trimester abortions, and in my opinion a 2nd or 3rd trimester abortion is a whole new can of worms.  If you're having an elective abortion (which I imagine would be the case for most teens seeking one) that's a decision that should be made in the 1st trimester, not the third.
We have fourty million reasons for failure, but not a single excuse  -- Rudyard Kipling

Develop compassion for your enemies, that is genuine compassion.  Limited compassion cannot produce this altruism.  -- H. H. the Dalai Lama

#57 Cait

Cait

    Democracy Dies in Darkness

  • Moderator
  • 10,810 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 05:02 PM

I've really made all the points I wanted to make.  I know there is always going to be anecdotal evidence of exceptions.  There are always exceptions in life.  I think this issue is simply where I draw the line as a Pro-Choice advocate.  This is my line in the sand.  I was a parent.  I know what it is like to get a phone call about your child being hurt and in the hospital in serious condition.  I can imagine what that would be like for a parent who gets a similar call about a daughter taken to the hospital because of complications in an abortion.  Maybe you have to be a parent to understand this particular part of the issue.

Additionally, I believe it is bad for society to allow children to make adult decisions about some things, and not about others.  If a teen has no adult rights, then he or she has no rights to sign a consent form for an abortion.  Parents have to be the ultimate authority in a family.  Just as a community has authority over citizens in a city. A state has authority over communities.  The Federal government has authority over States.  It's really rather simple in my book   Parental authority is undermined if parents are skipped in the "chain of command" so to speak.

And lastly, the State should not interfere in a family dynamic in this way.  It really is encroaching on the freedom of a family to decide its own direction.  It should be free to believe any religion it wishes.  It should be free to decide which schools to attend.  It should be free to choose the values it holds dear.  And, a family should be free to choose how it deals with teen sex and the question of abortion.  The State has no right to interfere where there is no abuse or other legal matter to address.

I am for parental notification for these three primary reasons.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.

Source:
http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html


#58 Mikoto

Mikoto

    Rejected on all levels.

  • Islander
  • 9,304 posts

Posted 07 October 2012 - 07:41 AM

View PostBad Wolf, on 06 October 2012 - 01:31 PM, said:

I think that history demonstrates that government does have a dog in the fight, or at least many people in government think they do or think that they should, which is why they try to legislate things that are really none of their business.

Lil makes a good point here, I might add. Its not so much of an issue in British politics but I am aware abortion is a huge issue in the US with certain political figures very much thinking they have a right to control the autonomy of women's bodies. Teenagers are still females on their way to full independance afterall.

All said and done its why I'm of the opinion parental notification is okay in most cases, provided there is a balance and the teenager gets private (and when I say private, I mean the parents aren't present during the sessions nor are they privvy to what was said), independant medical counselling so she (hopefully) gets to see both viewpoints and can make the most informed choice possible.

Edited by Mikoto, 07 October 2012 - 07:43 AM.

Rejected and gone.

#59 QueenTiye

QueenTiye

    Behavior is not reproducible over multiple trials.

  • Islander
  • 24,309 posts

Posted 07 October 2012 - 11:07 AM

I am a parent. In the main I agree with Cait.

Age of consent, maturity, voting, majority - all are culturally derived and should be culturally driven. Society in the US is currently strucured for kids to remain kids into their early 20s. Until kids are able to be fully responsible for their choices, they should be under the authority of their parents.

More soon,
QT

Een Draght Mackt Maght


#60 Lin731

Lin731
  • Islander
  • 4,126 posts

Posted 07 October 2012 - 12:39 PM

QT, so if you have a pro life parent deciding for her 16 year old daughter that she's gonna force her to carry to term even though she is far more likely to not graduate from high school, attend college or be financially stable because of that choice, you're okay with that?  See the problem on this issue is that the choices made for that minor carry over for their entire lives. Nothing like parental  approval to get a driver's licence or most other medical decisions. These decisions have lifetime impact on that girls future. I'm not sure I'm okay with that, where in most cases of parental authority I am very much for parents authority. I just see this issue as so much more than that.
Posted Image
Posted Image



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Abortion, Parental Notification

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users