# Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood - SCOTUS takes on an abortion case! **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 23, 2005, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayotte-v-planned-parenthood-scotus-takes-on-an-abortion-case/305190 "2005-05-23T23:51:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![minty\_green](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@minty\_green](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minty_green)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayotte-v-planned-parenthood-scotus-takes-on-an-abortion-case/305190/41 "2005-05-24T14:54:08Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I thought you [i.e., Diogenes] were one of the Tribe that wanted judges to have the power to do what they think is Right, by the way. What happened to that vaunted confidence in the judiciary? Judicial tyrrany trampling on legislative enactments is your boogeyman, not mine. My boogeyman is governmental tyrrany trampling on individual freedoms. My boogeyman is scarier than your boogeyman. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayotte-v-planned-parenthood-scotus-takes-on-an-abortion-case/305190/42 "2005-05-24T14:55:05Z")
> [@AHunter3](#): > > **Bricker** : > > I pray with at least equal fervor that it does. > > Do you think a parent should have the right to force a pregnant minor to undergo an abortion? When did “force” enter the picture? The issue under discussion is _notification_ of the parents. I believe the parents should have the right to be involved with the decision, at least to the extent of knowing about it. For the moment, I’m agnostic on the issue of whether parents should be able to force an eleven-year-old to have an abortion - or force the girl to carry the child to term. Should parents be able to force an eleven-year-old to undergo a liver transplant? Chemotherapy? A tumor biopsy? For the moment, I take no position on those question. I haven’t thought it out, and I am interested to see what arguments, pro and con, might develop. But I am ABSOLUTELY solid in the idea that parents should have a right to participate in the decision-making, and be informed of the issues. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayotte-v-planned-parenthood-scotus-takes-on-an-abortion-case/305190/43 "2005-05-24T14:56:00Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > _Forcing_ them into the loop will result in MORE bad decisions, not to mention more abuse. What is the upside? What good is accomplished by ratting them out to abusive parents? How will that _reduce_ bad decisions? How are parents harmed if they never know their kid had an abortion? Parents are harmed by not having all the info they need to regulate the behavior of their minor children. They won’t know, for instance, that their children are having unprotected sex. And again, you’re assuming that we can’t create a system to screen out most of the instances where abusive parents are the cause. The law can adress this. I do agree that the laws might need to have a sliding scale here. We needn’t treat a 16 or 17 year old girl the same as a 12 year old girl. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayotte-v-planned-parenthood-scotus-takes-on-an-abortion-case/305190/44 "2005-05-24T14:56:59Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > The same mahic judge powers he uses to decide if a police officer is telling the truth about smelling marijuana in an evidence suppression hearing, yes. The same magic judge powers that he uses in a bench trial to determine if the accused rapist is telling the truth when he says the sex was consensual. The same magic judge powers, in fact, that he is required to use every day as part of his job, and which until today I have never heard descriibed as “magic judge powers.” In those cases, the judge is weighing one person’s testimony _against_ something…other testimony, physical evidence, etc. In this case there is only the girl’s testimony and nothing else. There is no objective method for determining whether the testimony is truthful and there is too much risk of a judge tainting his or her decisions with personally biased feelings about abortion. The girl is not on trial, after all, she is seeking a legal procedure as is her right. The judge would only be deciding whether her right to privacy shouild be violated by informing other people against her wishes. > [@](#): > > No, but I don’t accept your crazy standard that we need “100% confidence” in order to make a judicial determination, either. I am confident that a judge will get it right in the vast majority of cases. And that confidence is based on what? Your _own_ magic powers of divination? It doesn’t matter, the judge getting it wrong one time is too much. More importantly, the knowledge that she will be interrogated by a judge and perhaps disbelieved will cause girls to seek out less safe choices. > [@](#): > > I thought you were one of the Tribe that wanted judges to have the power to do what they think is Right, by the way. What happened to that vaunted confidence in the judiciary? You must be confusing me with somebody else. I’ve never said any such thing. Just the opposite, in fact. I do not accept your position that the Massachusetts case amounted to 'activism" if that’s what you mean. I believe it was a straight up interpretation of the state constitution as written. > [@](#): > > It serves the notion that a parent has a great responsibility for the care and upbringing of a minor child. Non sequitur. Responsibility for care != a right for abusive parents to know about an abortion. > [@](#): > > Yes. And you’re begging the question by saying flatly that she is constitutionaly entitled to an abortion. No court has ever held that a minor has an absolute constitutional right to an abortion under all circumstances. I wasn’t aware that Roe V. wade made a distinction between adults and minors. . > [@](#): > > Ha ha! Then what’s the role of the judge? Exactly. The state has no role in this decision whatsoever. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayotte-v-planned-parenthood-scotus-takes-on-an-abortion-case/305190/45 "2005-05-24T15:00:03Z")
> [@minty green](#): > > Judicial tyrrany trampling on legislative enactments is your boogeyman, not mine. My boogeyman is governmental tyrrany trampling on individual freedoms. My boogeyman is scarier than your boogeyman. I’m pointing out that your boogeyman - governmental tyrrany trampling on individual freedoms - can arise from the very solution you proposed to keep your boogeyman at bay. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayotte-v-planned-parenthood-scotus-takes-on-an-abortion-case/305190/46 "2005-05-24T15:16:00Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > Non sequitur. Responsibility for care != a right for abusive parents to know about an abortion. You’re making an ENORMOUS leap here in positing that, since some parents may be abusers ALL should be treated as abusers, you know. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayotte-v-planned-parenthood-scotus-takes-on-an-abortion-case/305190/47 "2005-05-24T15:17:54Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > I wasn’t aware that Roe V. wade made a distinction between adults and minors. It does not. However, subsequent cases (_Lambert v. Wickland_) made clear that a state may require parental notification before a minor obtains an abortion. Requiring that BOTH parents are notified is too onerous (_Bellotti v. Baird_). As long as the law has a judicial bypass option, it meets constitutional requirements (_Ohio v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health_). ---
**Author:** ![Beadalin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/3be4f8/32.png) [@Beadalin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beadalin)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayotte-v-planned-parenthood-scotus-takes-on-an-abortion-case/305190/48 "2005-05-24T15:18:11Z")
Is “parental notification” the same as “parental permission”? This is one of the aspects of this issue that I’m not clear on. At what point would parents be notified? Do parents need to sign the equivalent of a permission slip for their minor child to have the procedure? What if the parents of the minor disagree on what should be done? In other words, who has the final say: the minor, or the minor’s parents? ---
**Author:** ![Orbifold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/779978/32.png) [@Orbifold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Orbifold)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayotte-v-planned-parenthood-scotus-takes-on-an-abortion-case/305190/49 "2005-05-24T15:18:20Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > But I am ABSOLUTELY solid in the idea that parents should have a right to participate in the decision-making, and be informed of the issues. Why? **villa** asked this question earlier, and the closest you came to answering was this: > [@](#): > > It serves the notion that a parent has a great responsibility for the care and upbringing of a minor child. Is that the extent of your answer, or do you have other reasons for this belief? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayotte-v-planned-parenthood-scotus-takes-on-an-abortion-case/305190/50 "2005-05-24T15:20:03Z")
> [@Beadalin](#): > > Is “parental notification” the same as “parental permission”? This is one of the aspects of this issue that I’m not clear on. At what point would parents be notified? Do parents need to sign the equivalent of a permission slip for their minor child to have the procedure? What if the parents of the minor disagree on what should be done? > > In other words, who has the final say: the minor, or the minor’s parents? No. Parental permission is NOT required - merely notification. ---
**Author:** ![minty\_green](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@minty\_green](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minty_green)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayotte-v-planned-parenthood-scotus-takes-on-an-abortion-case/305190/51 "2005-05-24T15:22:35Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I’m pointing out that your boogeyman - governmental tyrrany trampling on individual freedoms - can arise from the very solution you proposed to keep your boogeyman at bay. And I’m pointing out that I haven’t proposed whatever “solition” you think I’ve proposed. I’m just saying that I value individual freedoms, whereas you value legislative enactments. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayotte-v-planned-parenthood-scotus-takes-on-an-abortion-case/305190/52 "2005-05-24T15:22:37Z")
> [@Orbifold](#): > > Why? > > **villa** asked this question earlier, and the closest you came to answering was this: > > Is that the extent of your answer, or do you have other reasons for this belief? I think that’s a responsive answer. We do not quibble with the idea that a minor cannot decide, on her own, to have chemotherapy, or a liver transplant, or even a prescription acne treatment. Parents have a right - both in the moral sense and in the legally enforeable sense - to be informed about their children’s medical conditions, absent a showing to the contrary. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayotte-v-planned-parenthood-scotus-takes-on-an-abortion-case/305190/53 "2005-05-24T15:26:52Z")
> [@minty green](#): > > And I’m pointing out that I haven’t proposed whatever “solition” you think I’ve proposed. I’m just saying that I value individual freedoms, whereas you value legislative enactments. I value legislative enactments as the best way to ensure our freedoms. You value judicial enactments as the best way to ensure our freedoms. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayotte-v-planned-parenthood-scotus-takes-on-an-abortion-case/305190/54 "2005-05-24T15:32:14Z")
> [@Jonathan Chance](#): > > You’re making an ENORMOUS leap here in positing that, since some parents may be abusers ALL should be treated as abusers, you know. We’re not discussing how to “treat” parents, but how to treat minors seeking abortions. It is my position that any girl who claims abuse should be taken at her word. It is better to err on the side of the girl than upon some nebulous assumption that parents have an automatic right to know about their children’s reproductive decisions. Parents cannot be injured by not knowing their kid got an abortion. I also don’t buy that it has anything to do with care or upbringing. Reproductive decisions have lifelong consequences for the girl and parents should not have a right or opportunity to intimidate or browbeat her into a decision she doesn’t want to make and which will continue to affect her profoundly for the rest of her life. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayotte-v-planned-parenthood-scotus-takes-on-an-abortion-case/305190/55 "2005-05-24T15:36:34Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I think that’s a responsive answer. > > We do not quibble with the idea that a minor cannot decide, on her own, to have chemotherapy, or a liver transplant, or even a prescription acne treatment. Parents have a right - both in the moral sense and in the legally enforeable sense - to be informed about their children’s medical conditions, absent a showing to the contrary. The child’s expressed fear of abuse is a showing to the contrary. And this is a decision that has a far greater impact and consequence for the girl than for the parents. Her privacy needs to be protected while making this decision. I notice you haven’t addressed any of my concerns about minors being frightened into seeking less safe options. care to commment? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayotte-v-planned-parenthood-scotus-takes-on-an-abortion-case/305190/56 "2005-05-24T15:45:45Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > I notice you haven’t addressed any of my concerns about minors being frightened into seeking less safe options. care to commment? I don’t share your concern. ---
**Author:** ![Orbifold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/779978/32.png) [@Orbifold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Orbifold)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayotte-v-planned-parenthood-scotus-takes-on-an-abortion-case/305190/57 "2005-05-24T15:48:26Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > We do not quibble with the idea that a minor cannot decide, on her own, to have chemotherapy, or a liver transplant, or even a prescription acne treatment. Parents have a right - both in the moral sense and in the legally enforeable sense - to be informed about their children’s medical conditions, absent a showing to the contrary. But why shouldn’t we apply the reasoning that we already apply to married couples? The SCOTUS has already ruled that _spousal_ notification laws placed an undue burden on the category of women who were in abusive relationships. That was sufficient to to render spousal notification laws (in Pennsylvania, for example) unconstitutional even if such women were in the minority, because it placed a substantial obstacle in the path of women for whom the regulation was directly relevant. Husbands, it can be readily argued, have a responsibility to their wives in the same way that parents have a responsibility to their children. But it is precisely in the cases where husbands abuse that responsibility that spousal notification laws are detrimental. Now we have the same issue regarding parents and children. Parental notification laws but a burden on precisely those children whose parents have abused their responsibilities, a burden which as you would have it can only be relieved by requiring a scared child who has committed no crime to go in front of a judge and openly defy abusive parents (and let’s not forget how difficult such defiance can be). Why is this not an undue burden? ---
**Author:** ![minty\_green](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@minty\_green](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minty_green)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayotte-v-planned-parenthood-scotus-takes-on-an-abortion-case/305190/58 "2005-05-24T15:51:43Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I value legislative enactments as the best way to ensure our freedoms. You value judicial enactments as the best way to ensure our freedoms. Bollocks. I have made no normative valuation as to “the best way to ensure our freedoms.” Freedom is freedom, whether implemented by the legislature, the judiciary, or the mob. Same thing with tyrrany. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayotte-v-planned-parenthood-scotus-takes-on-an-abortion-case/305190/59 "2005-05-24T16:05:17Z")
> [@minty green](#): > > Bollocks. I have made no normative valuation as to “the best way to ensure our freedoms.” Freedom is freedom, whether implemented by the legislature, the judiciary, or the mob. Same thing with tyrrany. Ah. My mistake. Well, we simply disagree on what balance is best struck between individual freedom and the need for an orderly society in which the people, collectively, govern themselves. ---
**Author:** ![beagledave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6de8d8/32.png) [@beagledave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/beagledave)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2005, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayotte-v-planned-parenthood-scotus-takes-on-an-abortion-case/305190/60 "2005-05-24T16:13:14Z")
> [@Orbifold](#): > > Husbands, it can be readily argued, have a responsibility to their wives in the same way that parents have a responsibility to their children. Umm, really? The “responsibilities” are really comparable? Is there any jurist (or lawmaker) that has ever made that claim? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayotte-v-planned-parenthood-scotus-takes-on-an-abortion-case/305190.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayotte-v-planned-parenthood-scotus-takes-on-an-abortion-case/305190.md?page=4)