# Democratic Debate 9 March **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [March 10, 2016, 3:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-debate-9-march/748511 "2016-03-10T03:04:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2016, 7:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-debate-9-march/748511/21 "2016-03-11T07:02:45Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > [wipes tapioca off 45 automatic] Actually, the proof is in the pudding. I don’t understand this joke, but the only version of this aphorism I had ever heard was “the proof is in the pudding”. After Googling, I discover that it [did apparently originate](http://www.npr.org/2012/08/24/159975466/corrections-and-comments-to-stories) from the longer form ending in “eating”. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2016, 7:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-debate-9-march/748511/22 "2016-03-11T07:21:34Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > I couldn’t help but note that Sanders favors no restrictions on abortion other than that it’s “between a woman and her doctor”. > > My question though, is that is this a firm liberal principle, or are doctors allowed to exercise their conscience “for now”? Freedom of reproductive choice is a firm liberal principle, and, yes, that includes doctors’ rights too. No one is compelled to have, or to perform, an abortion. However, the phrase “Between a woman and her doctor” is meant to imply her freedom of choice, unconstrained and untrammeled by regulations and laws and other onerous obstacles. It does not, itself, refer to the doctor’s choice. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2016, 7:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-debate-9-march/748511/23 "2016-03-11T07:29:43Z")
Words mean things. If you just want to say that you believe in a woman’s right to choose, then there’s no need to invoke her doctor. That is actually an appeal to authority, to invoke a trusted person who shares the decision on whether to abort a pregnancy. But I do realize that when Democrats say that it’s just more political talk. Democrats do not believe that the decision to prescribe pain pills is strictly between a woman and her doctor. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2016, 7:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-debate-9-march/748511/24 "2016-03-11T07:57:23Z")
Anyone paying attention knows that I take on \*\*adaher \*\*as much, and as agressively, as anyone (in fact, s/he’s one of the few Dopers I really keep track of in terms of knowing by name “what their deal is”). But \*\*adaher \*\*is right on this one: Democratic messaging on abortion is confused and illogical to say the least. I’m personally pro-choice without any restrictions for the first trimester, but I do think it should be treated like other medical procedures. And that includes not only what \*\*adaher \*\*is referencing here, but also parental notification. To say that a doctor can’t give my daughter a Tylenol without my or her mother’s consent, but she can get an abortion without it, is patently absurd. And politically, the problem for Democrats is that the party is caught in a vise between the sensible majority of the public that agrees with me on the one hand, and a hardcore segment of the Democratic base on the other that insists on this illogical and extreme position. So to avoid getting killed in general elections, Democratic politicians have to mumblemumble a lot of nonsense like “between a woman and her doctor” and try to change the subject. It’s painful, cringe-inducing, to watch and hear. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2016, 1:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-debate-9-march/748511/25 "2016-03-11T13:08:24Z")
And yet Slacker the principles of minors having the ability to give independent consent regarding sexual health is well established in medicine and law in many states. Here’s my state, [Illinois](http://www.cico-il.org/legislation/childrens_health.html), for example. > [@](#): > > GENERAL MEDICAL TREATMENT INCLUDING ABORTION: Consent to performance of a medical or surgical procedure may be given by minors who are married, pregnant, or parents. Such minors are deemed to have the same rights (including right to confidentiality) as people 18 years of age and older. 410 ILCS 210/1. Just Section Quoted > BIRTH CONTROL: Doctors may provide birth control services and information to minors (under the age of 18 years), without the consent of parents or guardians, if they are married, a parent, pregnant, or referred for birth control services by a physician, clergyman, or a planned parenthood agency, or where a serious health hazard would be created by the failure to provide such services. 325 ILCS 10/1. Just Section Quoted > TESTING FOR HIV: Minors may consent to anonymous HIV testing. If a minor’s test result is positive, the health care provider shall make a reasonable effort to notify the minor’s parent or guardian if, in his or her professional judgment, notification would be in the best interest of the child, and the provider has first sought unsuccessfully to persuade the minor to notify the parent or guardian, or the provider has reason to believe that the minor has not made notification. The law does not create a duty or obligation under which a provider must notify the minor’s parent or legal guardian. 410 ILCS 305/9. Just Section Quoted > > RAPE VICTIMS: Where a minor is the alleged victim of an aggravated criminal sexual assault, criminal sexual assault, aggravated criminal sexual abuse or criminal sexual abuse, the consent of the minor’s parent or legal guardian need not be obtained to authorize a hospital, physician, or other medical personnel to furnish medical care or counseling related to the diagnosis or treatment of any disease or injury arising from such an offense. The minor may consent to such counseling, diagnosis, or treatment as if the minor had reached his or her age of majority. 410 ILCS 210/3(b). Just Section Quoted > > A sexual assault evidence collection kit may not be released by a hospital without the written consent of the sexual assault survivor. In the case of a survivor who is a minor 13 years of age or older, evidence and information concerning the alleged sexual assault may be released at the written request of the minor. 410 ILCS 70/6.4 Just Sections Quoted > > TREATMENT FOR SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASES: Minors 12 years of age or older who may have come in contact with any sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) may give consent to medical care or counseling related to a diagnosis or treatment of the disease. The consent of the parent, parents, or legal guardian shall not be necessary to authorize the medical care counseling. > With the minor’s consent, anyone involved in providing medical care to the minor, counseling related to the diagnosis, or treatment of the minor’s disease shall make reasonable efforts to involve the minor’s family in his or her treatment if the person furnishing the treatment believes that the involvement of the family will not be detrimental to the progress and care of the minor. Reasonable effort shall be extended to assist the minor in accepting his or her family’s involvement in the care and treatment being given. 410 ILCS 210/4. > Any person who provides counseling to a minor patient who has come into contact with any sexually transmitted disease may, but shall not be obligated to, inform the parent, parents, or legal guardian of the minor as to the treatment given or needed. 410 ILCS 210/5. Just Sections Quoted This is basic established medical standards. [Here’s](http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/tgr/03/4/gr030404.html) a broader discussion, albeit dating back a while. > [@](#): > > Minors who are sexually active, pregnant, or infected with a sexually transmitted disease (STD) and those who abuse drugs or alcohol or suffer from emotional or psychological problems may avoid seeking care if they must involve their parents. Recognizing this reality, many states explicitly authorize a minor to make decisions about their own medical care, but balancing the rights of parents and the rights of minors remains a topic of debate. > At the federal level, the focal point of debate over minors’ access to confidential services has been the Title X family planning program. Since its inception in 1970, services supported by Title X have been available to anyone who needs them without regard to age. As a result, Title X-supported clinics provide contraceptive services and other reproductive health care to minors on a confidential basis, although they encourage minors to involve their parents in their decision to seek services. Over the years, the provision of confidential contraceptive services to minors has come under attack from conservatives in Congress, who have repeatedly mounted efforts to require that a parent give consent or be notified before a minor receives these services in a Title X clinic. In 1998, the House of Representatives passed a parental notification requirement, but the Senate did not, and the provision was never enacted. > Similar debates have occurred at the state level. … > > … No state explicitly requires parental consent or notification for any of these services. However, two states—Texas and Utah—prohibit the use of state funds to provide contraceptive services to minors without parental consent. And one state—Iowa—requires that parents be notified if their child receives a positive HIV test. > In addition to laws and policies that permit minors to consent to specific services, 21 states have statutes that authorize minors to consent to general medical and surgical care, at least under some circumstances, such as having a child, being pregnant or having reached a certain age. In Alabama, for example, minors aged 14 and older may consent to general medical care; in South Carolina, they may do so at 16. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2016, 1:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-debate-9-march/748511/26 "2016-03-11T13:29:59Z")
I thought it was clear that I wasn’t saying those special carve-outs don’t exist. Of course they do. I’m saying they \*shouldn’t \*exist, and I’m pretty sure without even looking up polling data that the \*vast \*majority of parents agree with me. That makes for a politically very unstable situation, since laws can be changed. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-debate-9-march/748511/27 "2016-03-13T02:06:23Z")
If minors are capable of handling their own sexual health, they can handle their health care in general. Again, carveouts that exist due to politics need not and should not be recognized as legitimate by the SDMB community. Bullshit exists. Let’s shine the flashlight on it when we find it. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-debate-9-march/748511/28 "2016-03-13T02:39:59Z")
Speaking as doctor for children I would fight very hard against changing the laws that allow minors to obtain confidential care regarding sexual health. The impacts would be _seriously_ negative, especially to those teens whose parents are most likely to believe that their children should be denied care for those issues without their parental consent. In those families in particular many teens would rather have untreated STDs for example than have those parents know. What it would not do however is stop those teens from having sex. This is no bullshit. And if you actually looked for [polls](http://www.shiftnc.org/news-and-publications/research-and-publications/parent-poll-shows-bipartisan-support-for-sex-education-pregnancy-prevention) you’d find that those done actually have a solid majority of parents endorse minors being able to obtain sexual health resources without getting explicit permission from their parents. > [@](#): > > Overwhelming numbers of parents of school-age children support North Carolina’s sex education and pregnancy prevention laws, according to a new survey commissioned by the Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention Campaign of North Carolina (APPCNC). … 83% of parents labeled North Carolina’s Minor’s Right to Consent law as important … 93% of Democrats, 76% of Republicans, and 79% of independents favor North Carolina’s current Minor’s Right to Consent law … This was in face of efforts to make the law more restrictive. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 2:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-debate-9-march/748511/29 "2016-03-13T02:41:28Z")
But again, if they can do that, then they can also make decisions about their health care in general. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 2:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-debate-9-march/748511/30 "2016-03-13T02:44:22Z")
Such does not follow as there is no evidence of harm from requiring consent for routine care issues: a teen would not rather have appendicitis than tell a parent about their pain. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 2:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-debate-9-march/748511/31 "2016-03-13T02:53:34Z")
The potential harm is a reason for the exception, but not a reason for the general principle that minors must have their parents consent. Either minors are qualified to get care without their parents, or they are not. If they are not, then you can justify reproductive health care as an exception, with the understanding that they are kids and cannot be trusted to make good decisions, but we accept that tradeoff. You’ve done the opposite: you’ve stated clearly that they are quite qualified to make those decisions, which means they are qualified to make health care decisions in general. No exceptions are therefore needed, in the same way that I don’t need my wife’s permission to get a vasectomy OR a tooth filled. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 3:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-debate-9-march/748511/32 "2016-03-13T03:44:04Z")
Honestly what you are saying is a complete misrepresentation of what I said. It makes me wonder if maybe you should need your wife’s permission before you get medical care. To me the point is simple and it has been made. I will not engage here dealing with distortion games. If you want to start a GD on it and notify me that it is up then maybe I’ll play. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 4:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-debate-9-march/748511/33 "2016-03-13T04:21:10Z")
Fair enough, I just wanted to know if minors were competent to seek their own medical care or not. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2016, 10:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-debate-9-march/748511/34 "2016-03-13T10:51:01Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > And if you actually looked for [polls](http://www.shiftnc.org/news-and-publications/research-and-publications/parent-poll-shows-bipartisan-support-for-sex-education-pregnancy-prevention) you’d find that those done actually have a solid majority of parents endorse minors being able to obtain sexual health resources without getting explicit permission from their parents. [Gallup says otherwise](http://www.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx), at least regarding abortion. Their most recent poll number is five years old, but here are the percentages who favored a parental consent requirement in the polls they have conducted since 1992: 1992: 70% 1996: 74% 2003: 73% 2005: 69% 2011: 71% Hard to discern any trend there, so I highly doubt the number has dropped significantly since 2011. I suppose it’s possible that _parents themselves_ feel drastically differently than the public at large, but it would greatly surprise me. That would necessarily mean that something like 90+ percent of non-parent adults, including young unmarried people, believe parental consent should be required for abortion, but that a majority of parents feel the opposite. That doesn’t scan. Additionally, in 2012 [two polls](http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm) asked about contraception for teenagers. One found that by a margin of 52% to 46%, respondents favored allowing kids 16 and older to get contraception without parental consent. But another asked the same question but this time with “14 and over”. That was enough to tip it solidly the other way: the “disagree” camp won 55% - 41%, with the “completely disagree” side outnumbering the “completely agree” camp 36% to 23%. ETA: Note that the contraception survey did not have a conservative sample overall. A solid majority said employers should be required to provide contraceptive coverage at no cost; and a plurality of 49% even said religiously affiliated colleges and hospitals should have to. That means nearly one-fifth of that latter group peeled off when it came to allowing teens 14 and up to get contraceptive services without parental consent, and you can count me among that set. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2016, 1:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-debate-9-march/748511/35 "2016-03-14T13:51:11Z")
A funny _Washington Post_ spoof of the debate: [https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2016/03/10/the-washington-postunivision-democratic-debate-abridged/](https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2016/03/10/the-washington-postunivision-democratic-debate-abridged/) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-debate-9-march/748511.md?page=1)