07 Nov 05
Proposition 73 will be voted on in California tomorrow which basically states that minors will have to “notify” their parents prior to getting an abortion. . They DO NOT have to get approval, only notify them, but it appears this prop may fail. Why? Why should the state have more rights over a child than the parent? Part of the prop also states that under certain circumstance the child can avoid notifying their parents. The emotional trauma can be great from an abortion, why should the parent not even be made aware that this has happened to their child? The fact that a majority of adults in California would be in favor of 12, 13, 14, 15 year old girls being allowed to decide to have an abortion and go have a major medical procedure without even notifying their parents is insane; and it’s an example of how ideology has taken over CA. So what goes happens if something goes wrong during the procedure? Can the doctors then notify the parents? The problems and insanity never ends for those opposed to this proposition.
07 Nov 05
Originally posted by newdad27What if the daughter is pregnant because of rape by the father? Would informing the father of her intention to have an abortion be a good idea?
Proposition 73 will be voted on in California tomorrow which basically states that minors will have to “notify” their parents prior to getting an abortion. . They DO NOT have to get approval, only notify them, but it appears this prop may fail. Why? Why should the state have more rights over a child than the parent? Part of the prop also states that un ...[text shortened]... notify the parents? The problems and insanity never ends for those opposed to this proposition.
07 Nov 05
1 edit
Originally posted by newdad27I have a question first. Are people under the age of 18 in California allowed to have other medical procedures performed on them without permission from their parent(s)? Suppose a 16 year old wants to have breast enhancement surgery. Would the state of CA allow that?
Proposition 73 will be voted on in California tomorrow which basically states that minors will have to “notify” their parents prior to getting an abortion. . They DO NOT have to get approval, only notify them, but it appears this prop may fail. Why? Why should the state have more rights over a child than the parent? Part of the prop also st ...[text shortened]... notify the parents? The problems and insanity never ends for those opposed to this proposition.
07 Nov 05
2 edits
Originally posted by newdad27Cut the crap. In the abortion thread, you already said you think abortion is murder, so stop pretending this as anything to do with the well-being of pregnant teenagers. It's another attempt to throw a roadblock in the way of the right of choice in procreative matters. This is esp. so since the courts threw out a parental CONSENT law in California.
Proposition 73 will be voted on in California tomorrow which basically states that minors will have to “notify” their parents prior to getting an abortion. . They DO NOT have to get approval, only notify them, but it appears this prop may fail. Why? Why should the state have more rights over a child than the parent? Part of the prop also states that un ...[text shortened]... notify the parents? The problems and insanity never ends for those opposed to this proposition.
EDIT: Parental involvement laws "increase the gestational age at which the induced pregnancy termination occurs, thereby also increasing the risk associated with the procedure." American Medical Association. 10
Overview:
In many areas of the U.S., youths who have not reached their 18th birthday have the right to seek medical and mental health treatment without their parent's or guardians knowledge or consent. "...no state explicitly requires parental consent for contraceptive services; testing or treatment for sexually transmitted diseases including HIV; counseling and medical care for drug and alcohol abuse; or outpatient mental health services. In at least half the states, minors have the explicit authority to consent to contraceptive services and to prenatal care and delivery services. Moreover, 34 states and the District of Columbia explicitly permit a minor mother to place her child for adoption without her own parents' permission or knowledge." 18 However, many states require her either to notify or to get permission from a parent or guardian before obtaining an abortion. As of 2005-APR. 30 states have such laws in place.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_pare.htm
07 Nov 05
Originally posted by wibNice choice of surgery comparision there.
I have a question first. Are people under the age of 18 in California allowed to have other medical procedures performed on them without permission from their parent(s)? Suppose a 16 year old wants to have breast enhancement surgery. Would the state of CA allow that?
07 Nov 05
Originally posted by newdad27On this principle, I agree with you: it is disturbing to think of a young teenager undergoing this procedure without the involvement of her parents. Yet, as Xanthos's post suggests, there are circumstances that lead to that situation which could make parental notification something that endangers rather than helps the child.
Proposition 73 will be voted on in California tomorrow which basically states that minors will have to “notify” their parents prior to getting an abortion...
You bring up a legitimate problem; I am not convinced Prop 73 is a good solution to that problem. Furthermore, I am displeased by the sneaky effort to get language into the Constitution defining a fetus as an unborn child in a quiet effort to establish legal precedent for the anti-choice side of the abortion debate. (Have you read the language of the measure?) It is a bold political move, counting on the fact that this is not going to be debated in the legislature, but decided by voters who won't research the measure.
07 Nov 05
Originally posted by newdad27I have not seen a Proposition or Initiative in ten years that deserves my support. Nearly all of them are right-wing revolts against good government. Just say NO!
Proposition 73 will be voted on in California tomorrow which basically states that minors will have to “notify” their parents prior to getting an abortion. . They DO NOT have to get approval, only notify them, but it appears this prop may fail. Why? Why should the state have more rights over a child than the parent? Part of the prop also states that un ...[text shortened]... notify the parents? The problems and insanity never ends for those opposed to this proposition.
07 Nov 05
Originally posted by zeeblebotThe text refers to "unemanicipated minor females", so the answer to your question is apparently "no". http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/bp_nov05/voter_info_pdf/text73.pdf.
they could legally separate from their parents if they don't want their parents' support.
are non-supporting parents excluded from the law?
Still, it's just another right-wing governmental intrusion on basic and fundamental rights.
08 Nov 05
Originally posted by XanthosNZlike i said in the orig. post there are exceptions were the minor can go before a judge and explain that she will be in danger etc and have the requirement of parental notification waived. Your example would fall into that category, thus there is no valid reason for this prop to be voted down.
What if the daughter is pregnant because of rape by the father? Would informing the father of her intention to have an abortion be a good idea?
08 Nov 05
Originally posted by no1marauderi guess i can throw you in with the other loons in Ca that would vote this down. People like you just want abortion on demand, anytime for any reason. This isn't a roe v wade issue, this is a parental rights issue, nice try in spinning the issue. A 15 yr old should not be able to go get an abortion at 8.5 months (or any other time) because she is getting scared, go home and act like nothing happened, and her parents never know what happened or what she is going through. The fact that you think she should be able to says plenty about you.
Cut the crap. In the abortion thread, you already said you think abortion is murder, so stop pretending this as anything to do with the well-being of pregnant teenagers. It's another attempt to throw a roadblock in the way of the right of choice in procreative matters. This is esp. so since the courts threw out a parental CONSENT law in California.
E ...[text shortened]... f 2005-APR. 30 states have such laws in place.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_pare.htm
08 Nov 05
Originally posted by DelmerIf you read my orig post for this thread then i guess you read that the minor DOES NOT!!!! have to get consent, they just have to notify. Get the issue right first.
If the kid has insurance or can pay for it, let her abort without anyone's consent. If the taxpayers have to pay for it then make the kid join a public service program until the debt is paid off.
08 Nov 05
Originally posted by Wulebgri guess some just cannot think. Keep reading the web sights and radical left wing propagandists. If you really cannot see through your ideological glasses on this issue you have a problem. This one is a no-brainer, that is why i brought it up...to bring the crazy loons like your self out. The fact that you cannot even judge this issue on its merits will discount anything you post in the future. Why don't you give me the biggest problem with this prop, besides your paranoia about the government.
I have not seen a Proposition or Initiative in ten years that deserves my support. Nearly all of them are right-wing revolts against good government. Just say NO!