# Interesting abortion/legal case in Houston
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-abortion-legal-case-in-houston/240162
**Category:** Great Debates
**Created:** [April 15, 2004, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-abortion-legal-case-in-houston/240162 "2004-04-15T13:48:02Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Ca3799](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ca3799)
#### Post date: [April 15, 2004, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-abortion-legal-case-in-houston/240162/1 "2004-04-15T13:48:02Z")
> **[Plaintiffs win suit but no money for underage abortion](https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Plaintiffs-win-suit-but-no-money-for-underage-1975229.php)**
>
> A jury Wednesday awarded no money to a woman and her father who sued an osteopath for...
I’m surprised this case hasn’t received more attention in the press.
An underaged woman (a few weeks shy of her 18th birthday) obtained a false ID and then obtained an abortion. She later sued the Doctor, saying that he and the clinic should have not provided the abortion. She says the clinic should have known she was underage because her ID was fake. The clinic says it’s not their fault that she lied to them.
There are some interesting family issues here, too. The woman’s father is a minister. It was not reported in the article, but whe was quoted on tv as saying she didn’t know her father’s stance on abortion and would not have obtained one had she known.
The case was decided with 90% fault to the woman and 10% to the doctor, and no monetary award was given to either party.
I find it hard to believe she even brought the suit, and wondered what her ultimate purpose in doing so is/was. I can’t say I’m too sympatheric toward her position as I know she lied about ther age and I strongly suspect she is lying about her not knowing her father’s stance on this issue. That she continued to see the father of the pregnancy, had two more children with him and then marry him makes me think she’s just flakey (and that her Dad hasn’t been able to get his mesasage across). I guess there’s no crime in that but it does detract from her credibilty (even more) to me.
---
### Author:  [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)
#### Post date: [April 15, 2004, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-abortion-legal-case-in-houston/240162/2 "2004-04-15T14:42:06Z")
> [@Ca3799](#):
>
> I find it hard to believe she even brought the suit, and wondered what her ultimate purpose in doing so is/was.
Guilt? Wanting to have her cake and eat it too?
---
### Author:  [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)
#### Post date: [April 15, 2004, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-abortion-legal-case-in-houston/240162/3 "2004-04-15T15:16:20Z")
I supose it depends on whether or not the clinic was diligent in making sure she wasn’t underaged.
In french law, there’s a rule stating that “nul ne peut se prevaloir de ses propres turpitudes” (Not sure how to translate it since it has quite a large scope, but it means amonst other things that you can’t use your own crimes as a defense). In particular, it means that you can’t seek damages for something which was a direct result of your own unlawful actions (for instance, you can’t seek damages if you tried to hit me in the face and broke your hand on my jaw). However, one’s unlawful conduct isn’t necessarily the direct or the only cause of the resulting damages.
I was refering to french law, but it seems to me it applies (frm a common sense, not legal) point of view in this case.
If for instance the girl looked like a 13 y.o. and the ID was a blatant fake, one could suspect that either the clinic was extremely negligent or actually willingly provided the abortion to someone they knew was underaged. In both case, I think they would be at fault.
Besides, since precisely we assume that underaged people aren’t fully responsible for their actions, the fact that the girl acted in a deceitful way doesn’t absolve the clinic from its own responsability.
I too would tend to have a very poor view of her behavior, but it might be possible that she was really a very irresponsible teenager when she requested abortion, is really full of remorse now, and think that the clinic’s staff should and could have prevented her for getting the abortion. That say, from an ethical (not legal) point of view, even if it’s actually the case, though perhaps the clinic could be blamed, I don’t thing she should receive damages for having lied and faked documents. Except once again if the clinic was negligent to an extreme extent.
Not that such a suit could happen over here, anyway, since underaged girls can get abortions without their parent’s consent. Which is, IMO, a good thing.
---
### Author:  [@HumptysHamhole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HumptysHamhole)
#### Post date: [April 15, 2004, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-abortion-legal-case-in-houston/240162/4 "2004-04-15T15:37:36Z")
The case was ultimately decided on what the parental notification law says specifically about the situation. At the time of the abortion the law only stated that the clinic had to verify age with picture ID. It didn’t say what type of ID it had to be or to what lengths the clinic had to go to in order to accpet it as valid. The jury found that the clinic didn’t technically break the law enough to warrent damages.
But I still think that the clinic should have been held 50% responsible (but no more than that) for performing the procedure. If bartenders and store clerks are held responsible for accepting fake IDs when selling beer then why shouldn’t clinics be held to the same standard?
---
### Author:  [@Tokyo\_Mann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tokyo_Mann)
#### Post date: [April 18, 2004, 6:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-abortion-legal-case-in-houston/240162/5 "2004-04-18T06:51:29Z")
> [@clairobscur](#):
>
> In french law, there’s a rule stating that “nul ne peut se prevaloir de ses propres turpitudes” (Not sure how to translate it since it has quite a large scope, but it means amonst other things that you can’t use your own crimes as a defense). In particular, it means that you can’t seek damages for something which was a direct result of your own unlawful actions (for instance, you can’t seek damages if you tried to hit me in the face and broke your hand on my jaw).
IANAL, but this sounds like the principle of “dirty hands”
> [@](#):
>
> (1) Maxim that a party whose actions cause the other party to breach, may not complain. (2) When the plaintiff took inappropriate steps in attempting to recoup a loss prior to bringing a claim.
I think the law suit is outrageous. She should take some personal responsibility, for chrissake.
---
### Author:  [@Ms2001](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ms2001)
#### Post date: [April 18, 2004, 10:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-abortion-legal-case-in-houston/240162/6 "2004-04-18T10:37:14Z")
> [@HumptysHamhole](#):
>
> But I still think that the clinic should have been held 50% responsible (but no more than that) for performing the procedure. If bartenders and store clerks are held responsible for accepting fake IDs when selling beer then why shouldn’t clinics be held to the same standard?
I don’t think any of them should be held to that standard. You can’t expect every clerk to be able to catch every fake ID. If there’s a set procedure for validating IDs, they followed it, and they still didn’t catch the fake, then any blame should fall on whoever made or used the fake.
---
### Author:  [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)
#### Post date: [April 18, 2004, 12:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-abortion-legal-case-in-houston/240162/7 "2004-04-18T12:46:36Z")
According to the link, it was NOT a government ID. She got it at a supermarket.
> [@](#):
>
> Hughes, who was seven weeks shy of her 18th birthday at the time of the August 2000 abortion, used an ID she obtained from a supermarket to convince Karpen and employees of his clinic that she was 18.
> \
>
> “It was so easy for me to get an ID that was clearly not a government ID,” Hughes said
At the very least, the doc should have asked to see a driver’s licsense. But still, she shouldn’t get a dime.
---
### Author:  [@Abbie\_Carmichael](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Abbie_Carmichael)
#### Post date: [April 18, 2004, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-abortion-legal-case-in-houston/240162/8 "2004-04-18T14:48:08Z")
Rabid pro-lifer here who thinks the lawsuit was BS.
The law didn’t require a government ID at the time. The clinic acted in good faith that the girl wasn’t lying (I doubt they would have cared either way but on paper their noses are clean). She committed fraud and now she wants money? Puhleze.
Why didn’t they sue the grocery store that sold her the fake ID?
**It was not reported in the article, but whe was quoted on tv as saying she didn’t know her father’s stance on abortion and would not have obtained one had she known.**
I think she’s lying about this, too.
Her dad is a **Pentecostal** preacher and she “doesn’t know” what he thinks? I’m Pentecostal. We aren’t quiet about subjects like this, and besides: he’s a preacher. Odds are VERY heavy that Dad’s a pro-lifer and wouldn’t have approved of the abortion. Even on the (less than 1%) chance that Dad had _NEVER_ mentioned his feelings on the subject in the 17 years she’d lived with him, was she really dumb enough to think that Dad would have been okay with it?
I imagine she knew Dad would freak out and talk her out of it, so she got a fake ID and had it done. Then a few years later she started regretting it, and besides she’s got 2 new kids to feed so she needed some cash.
Rar.
---
### Author:  [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)
#### Post date: [April 18, 2004, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-abortion-legal-case-in-houston/240162/9 "2004-04-18T19:31:31Z")
Maybe this is the cynic in me, but is it possible this was a stunt? She and her father cooked up an idea-she’s pregnant, and has an abortion, to lie about her age, and THEN make the clinic look bad?
It wouldn’t surprise me. Considering the lengths people have gone to in the abortion debate…
---
### Author:  [@ParentalAdvisory](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ParentalAdvisory)
#### Post date: [April 18, 2004, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-abortion-legal-case-in-houston/240162/10 "2004-04-18T19:50:13Z")
So you’re saying that she faked her pregnancy, to get an abortion, to make the clinic look bad?
I doubt it. But if it’s true, that’s one sick family. I would think the doctor performing the abortion would know if she’s pregnant or not, right?
---
### Author:  [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)
#### Post date: [April 19, 2004, 1:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-abortion-legal-case-in-houston/240162/11 "2004-04-19T01:39:24Z")
No, she really was pregnant.
However, once she found out, maybe she decided she didn’t want the kid, and maybe dad said, “well, get an abortion-but we’ll do it in such a way that will make them look bad instead of us.”
Or something.
You know what-I just realized, my theory is really stupid. Dammit, never mind.
---
### Author:  [@Moirai](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moirai)
#### Post date: [April 19, 2004, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-abortion-legal-case-in-houston/240162/12 "2004-04-19T03:31:14Z")
I had an abortion in CA without my parents’ knowledge when I was 17. I used my real DL as ID.
Granted, that was almost 20 years ago. Have the age laws changed?
---
### Author:  [@Dan\_Norder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dan_Norder)
#### Post date: [April 23, 2004, 11:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-abortion-legal-case-in-houston/240162/13 "2004-04-23T11:50:00Z")
> [@EJsGirl](#):
>
> Granted, that was almost 20 years ago. Have the age laws changed?
Uh, yeah.
And the Soviet Union fell, there’s this thing called the Internet now, and we’ve had three Presidents since then. Just thought you should know.
---
### Author:  [@Moirai](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moirai)
#### Post date: [April 24, 2004, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-abortion-legal-case-in-houston/240162/14 "2004-04-24T20:59:05Z")
Thanks for the sarcasm, Dan. I always need a little on the weekends.
I asked because it is my understanding that an underage girl still doesn’t need parental consent for an abortion, at least here in CA. Does it now require a parent’s permission, just like every other surgical procedure on the planet?
---
### Author:  [@kung\_fu\_lola](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kung_fu_lola)
#### Post date: [April 25, 2004, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-abortion-legal-case-in-houston/240162/15 "2004-04-25T17:57:26Z")
[From here:](http://www.texmed.org/pmt/lel/consentminors.asp)
> [@](#):
>
> The Family Code lists instances where a minor child can consent to certain types of medical treatment on their own. This list is as follows:
>
> [ul]
> [li]A minor on active duty with the armed forces of the United States can consent to any medical treatment. [/li][li]A minor who is 16 years of age or older, resided apart from his or her parents, and manages his or her own financial affairs, regardless of the source of income, can consent to any medical treatment. [/li][li]A minor can consent to diagnosis and treatment of any infectious, contagious or communicable disease which is reportable to the Texas Department of Health. [/li][li]A minor who is unmarried and pregnant can consent to treatment of pregnancy **other than abortion.** [/li][li]A minor can consent to examination and treatment for addiction, dependency, or any other condition related directly to drug or chemical use. [/li][li]A minor can consent to counseling for suicide prevention, chemical addiction or dependency, or sexual, physical or emotional abuse. [/ul][/li]
> Note that the Family Code does not appear to give minors the right to consent to contraceptives or other prescription birth control devices.
(bolding NOT mine).
The same cite defines “minor” as:
> [@](#):
>
> A “minor” is a person under 18 years of age who has never been married and never been declared an adult by a court.
So, there you have it.
---
### Author:  [@Ms2001](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ms2001)
#### Post date: [April 26, 2004, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-abortion-legal-case-in-houston/240162/16 "2004-04-26T02:40:04Z")
Note: That’s Texas law, not California.
---
### Author:  [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)
#### Post date: [April 26, 2004, 6:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-abortion-legal-case-in-houston/240162/17 "2004-04-26T06:20:05Z")
> [@EJsGirl](#):
>
> Thanks for the sarcasm, Dan. I always need a little on the weekends.
>
> I asked because it is my understanding that an underage girl still doesn’t need parental consent for an abortion, at least here in CA. Does it now require a parent’s permission, just like every other surgical procedure on the planet?
Depends on the state. SCOTUS has struck down several abortion-limitation clauses as unconstitutional; however, _Planned Parenthood v. Ashcroft_ (along with numerous other cases) established that parental consent requirements were legal IF the statute contained a provision allowing the minor to get consent from a judge instead (if she was worried about physical violence if she informed her parents, for example).
> [@clairobscur](#):
>
> In particular, it means that you can’t seek damages for something which was a direct result of your own unlawful actions
A sensible concept, but not really one that applies to US tort law. Juries are expected to apply common sense in deciding tort cases, but generally they aren’t much good at it. Liability is usually established by determining who is most at fault, _whether or not_ their actions were legal.
---
### Author:  [@kung\_fu\_lola](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kung_fu_lola)
#### Post date: [April 26, 2004, 1:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-abortion-legal-case-in-houston/240162/18 "2004-04-26T13:00:06Z")
> [@Mr2001](#):
>
> Note: That’s Texas law, not California.
Which is where the cited article took place. Or is there a Houston Chronicle in CA?
signed,
Geographically-challenged Canuck
---
### Author:  [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)
#### Post date: [April 26, 2004, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-abortion-legal-case-in-houston/240162/19 "2004-04-26T15:08:59Z")
I smell a big fat rat-sized stunt here, myself - **Guin** , I really don’t think you’re too far off.
First off, we have a young girl who resorts to deception in order to subvert a known law (i.e. parental notification) in order to receive an abortion in a state with that particular legal requirement. Then, four years later - I’m guessing this trial didn’t last four years - the girl _and her father_ sue the clinic for failure to properly observe the legal requirements of the state of Texas. Note particularly this quote from Daddy:
> [@](#):
>
> “I’m very pleased with the verdict… My purpose was to expose the clinic. … Money wasn’t the issue at any time.”
In other words, the suit was brought basically to provide the clinic with a legal hassle. Then we have the young lady’s Appeal to the Majority:
> [@](#):
>
> “It was so easy for me to get an ID that was clearly not a government ID… I know a lot of girls do the exact same thing and no one blinks an eye.”
And so she’d rather sue a clinic over her own deception than maybe actually question the parental notification law.
End result? Making it harder for teenaged girls, who are already in a desperate situation, to exercise some form of control over their own lives. Clinics in Texas, to avoid similar lawsuits, will have to examine IDs in detail and reject anything that looks even remotely fake, forcing a patient who isn’t yet 18 onto the mercy of their parents, who may not yet know their daughter is pregnant (or even sexually active) and whose reaction the girl obviously fears if she’s trying to get an abortion without their knowledge and consent in the first place.
---
### Author:  [@Ms2001](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ms2001)
#### Post date: [April 27, 2004, 4:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-abortion-legal-case-in-houston/240162/20 "2004-04-27T04:54:19Z")
> [@kung fu lola](#):
>
> Which is where the cited article took place. Or is there a Houston Chronicle in CA?
Ah, I see now. You’re right, parental consent seems to be required in Texas; **EJsGirl** may also be right that it’s not required in California.