I agree. However, counseling =!= surgury. How does one explain complications from a D&C that require follow-up care to parents that were unaware of the procedure to begin with?
I would also expect any counselor working with a minor child to encourage the patient to include their parents in therapy, assuming that the parents were not the cause of the problem. If the parents were the cause, I would expect a call to CPS.
All things being equal, I don’t like the idea of the system assisting a minor in deceiving their parents. If the parents are not abusive, there is no reason to keep the secret. If they are, someone should step in for the child rather than allowing an abortion and then sending the child back to their environment.
I just don’t see non-disclosure as fixing any problems- only hiding and delaying the fallout. I don’t think it’s an outcome the state should be aiming for.
Are you only calling it rash or unwise because I would decide to abort? Who would you side with if I had wanted to keep the kid and my father wanted an abortion?
That is not an alternative to pregnancy.
I ruled it out more than ten years ago for numerous reasons, not the least of which being that I do not want someone showing up at my door 18 or 20 years in the future demanding to know why I gave them up.
Not necessarily. In many states, the age of consent for sex is sixteen, not eighteen.
Like that ‘Birthright’ organization.
In that instance, perhaps he would’ve found out. But then it would’ve been too late to stop me, and I would’ve lived with the consequences of having been found out.
I don’t think that it’s deceit. I think there are some things that just don’t need to be out in the open.
The problem is that, essentially, all we have to go on is the child’s word. Who exactly can we ask to corroborate or dispute her word, without risking news getting back to her potentially abusive parents?
For what it’s worth, I believe that most parents would be much more supportive and understanding than their children give them credit for. However, if the child insists that they wouldn’t, how are we to decide?
And I think the state should stay out of it altogether. Why are they trying to legislate family dynamics?
This is an excellent point. My daughter knows how I feel about the issue. I knew how my parents felt. Anyone who hasn’t discussed the issue at all with a daughter who is capable of childbearing is an inept parent, in my opinon.
Thank you! I think I just might, now that I’ve taken the leap.
How is this any different from explaining it if the parents did know? And how about explaining the complications from the kid going to a backalley abortionist because she felt that going to a real doctor would mean her parents would find out?
I’d expect most doctors would talk to the child about informing parents. Nothing in the current laws prevents this - they just prevent the doctor being forced to inform the parents, and preserves doctor patient confidentiality.
As for CPS - you have heard of the cases where they left kids in abusive situations, right? You think all abusive parents are monsters all the time? I’m sure many will be charming when the caseworker brings the child home - right up to the time the door closes.
What percentage of girls in this situation need to get beaten, abused, or worse before you think notification is not such a good idea all the time?
That is not what I said. I did not say that the decision would be rash or unwise.
What I said is that the individual who is personally afflicted–that is, the person who has the greatest personal stake in the matter–is not necessarily the best person to make these decisions. That’s because someone who’s in the throes of crisis is more prone to say “Fix it! Fix it now! I don’t care how!” – **especially ** when that person is a teenager!
That is why I favor parental consent. Parents can help provide wisdom, caution and discernment that the teenagers are more likely to lack. Even if we set aside all moral considerations, there’s still the fact that parents are more likely to ask careful questions, such as “What are the medical risks?”, “How qualified is this physician?” and “What are the alternatives to abortion?”
Quite the contrary. They are NOT as close to the problem as the children are. Furthermore, the fact that they DON’T have the same compelling interest is a factor in their favor.
There’s a reason why physicians will often refer family members to other physicians, when life-and-death matters are involved. It is often helpful to involve people who can be more objective in times of crisis. Of course, we cannot have complete objectivity, but a parent can at least speak with more detachment that the child who’s in the midst of crisis.
I’m not sure about that at all. Do you have children? My daughter’s crises certainly *feel * like crises to me, and I’m not one tiny bit detached when it comes to things that affect her.
So that stuff from Clinton about making abortion “safe, legal and rare” makes him a pro-lifer?
Who knew?
Obviously not - it is an alternative to abortion.
But it is not necessarily true that any decision other than what you have decided in advance is an unjust decision. As I mentioned, your hypothetical teen-age self, so hell-bent on abortion that you refuse even to consider any alternative, is not necessarily prepared to make the best decision.
Maybe you’re wrong. Maybe abortion really is murder. This is a decision that ought to be left up to those who are required to make it. And, if those people are not capable of making the decision responsibly - like, for instance, a minor child - then those who are presumed to have their best interests at heart should be the ones who make it.
She’s a minor, so her father is in charge. I have no input besides my opinion, which she asked for.
There’s a typo in your post. You said “women”. You meant to say “children”.
You know, those people who we don’t allow to drink or smoke or get married or have sex or drive cars without their parents’ permission.
Presumably their children.
Wow - don’t think much of unwed mothers, do you? Would you suggest that they should all be forced to undergo abortions? Or have their children confiscated at birth?
Since we are so avid to prevent child abuse at the hands of their unfit parents…
There’s a difference between pregnancy outside of wedlock and an unwanted pregnancy. Married women can have unwanted pregnancies, and unmarried women can have wanted pregnancies.
Maybe the girl feels that abortion is murder, and her parents disagree. Do you believe that, in that instance, they be allowed to make her have an abortion, as we can presume that they have her best interests at heart?
I (and, I think a couple of other posters) keep asking this question, and so far no one has answered it.
Which for me is not an alternative I am willing to entertain. I did so long before I started having sex, and made up my mind then.
With respect to whether or not I become a mother, it most certainly is unjust to overrule me.
I made the decision before I ever had sex. I considered the ‘What if…’ and what the options were, and I chose one. My mind has not changed in the decade plus since then.
It comes down to your pro-life views in the end, I see.
My best interests could not possibly be served by an unwaveringly anti-choice father who would not consider the option of abortion at all. I was smart enough to realize this at sixteen and determine myself to keep him out of my sex life.
What if her mother sides with her?
Ah, your anti-choice views again. At the point at which an abortion would take place there is no child.
No, abortion is not murder; unless a person is killed, it cannot be murder, and a mindless fetus is not a person. Only by twisting the term into uselessness can you qualify abortion as murder; you might as well say it’s murder if I scratch myself.
So, the question then is, is a teen pregnancy an automatic emancipation in the eyes of the law?
And please bear in mind, I’m very much pro-choice- I don’t think that the parents should have final say over whether the girl has the procedure, but I also think that keeping them in the dark is also not a good solution.
Pregnancy is not an automatic emancipation, but becoming a parent is damn close. The teen will be one of the people legally responsible for the care of the baby- sure, her parents might help, but if the baby is neglected, it’s the teen who will be brought into court not her parents. After giving birth the teen will be able to make all medical decisions for the baby - and in my state , her own as well. She’ll be able to make plenty of other decions for the baby , too- whether to place the baby into foster care or surrender for adoption. And her parents will have no say in those decisions, which will take place only months after the decision regarding an abortion would have been made.
On one side you have the argument that the girl might be beaten bu her parents - bad logic, as I pointed out beating your child is a crime in itself.
On the other side you have a frightened girl who now has the support of her parents and open lines of communication - a very good thing which is what we as a society want.
You need a logic refresher. All pro-lifers wanting to decrease the number of abortions does not imply that someone wishing to decrease the number of abortions is a pro-lifer. Got it? Lib would be ashamed of you.
That’s really all you’ve gotten out of this discussion? Are you just being disingenuous, or do you really believe that those are the only possible outcomes? And if it’s the latter, that’s a nice world you live in. Can I get directions to it?
And, since I’m here, I’ll ask again.
**If you’ve argued that the parents have the right to make all decisions regarding a minor’s pregnancy, do you believe that means they have the right to make the girl have an abortion? **