Abortion, Teens, & Parents

Kitsune · Post by **Kitsune** » 2003-06-27 04:24pm

I kind of am undecided on this. Should parents have to be informed if a teenager (under 18) gtes an abortion and why?

InnerBrat · Post by **InnerBrat** » 2003-06-27 05:37pm

No. It's a violation of the hypocratic oath, and it's the girls' decision, not theirs. if they're such bad parents that she doesn't trust them, then tough.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-06-27 05:43pm

No. It's an unnecessary complication.

Darth Yoshi · Post by **Darth Yoshi** » 2003-06-27 05:52pm

Why should she? Ultimately it's her decision, unless her parents will be picking up the tab.

Kitsune · Post by **Kitsune** » 2003-06-27 06:10pm

I have to agree stongly with what you said, the concern is basically that a parent has a right to know if their chaild is using drugs or has failing grades. Basically, so the parent can help the children. I see many parents may not be fair about pregnancy though especially if they are very religious. They will say "I did not do that" when teh reality is that they really did.

Xenophobe3691 · Post by **Xenophobe3691** » 2003-06-27 07:25pm

Kitsune wrote:I have to agree stongly with what you said, the concern is basically that a parent has a right to know if their chaild is using drugs or has failing grades. Basically, so the parent can help the children. I see many parents may not be fair about pregnancy though especially if they are very religious. They will say "I did not do that" when teh reality is that they really did.

I say yes, let the parents know, AFTER the child's made the decision. While the decision IS the child's, under 18, they're still under their parents' jurisdiction and care. The parents should know what the hell's going on, but let the kid make their own decision please. We're not as stupid as you think.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2003-06-27 08:57pm

Kitsune wrote:I have to agree stongly with what you said, the concern is basically that a parent has a right to know if their chaild is using drugs or has failing grades. Basically, so the parent can help the children. I see many parents may not be fair about pregnancy though especially if they are very religious. They will say "I did not do that" when teh reality is that they really did.

But the doctor involved cannot inform the parents. Doctor-patient confidentiality prevents it.

Kitsune · Post by **Kitsune** » 2003-06-27 09:37pm

Vorlon1701 wrote: I say yes, let the parents know, AFTER the child's made the decision. While the decision IS the child's, under 18, they're still under their parents' jurisdiction and care. The parents should know what the hell's going on, but let the kid make their own decision please. We're not as stupid as you think.

This is second hand but someone was telling me about parents who have beaten up their children after finding out they have an abortion. Don't know if it is true, does anyone have sources?

SyntaxVorlon · Post by **SyntaxVorlon** » 2003-06-28 01:13am

Vorlon1701 wrote:
Kitsune wrote:I have to agree stongly with what you said, the concern is basically that a parent has a right to know if their chaild is using drugs or has failing grades. Basically, so the parent can help the children. I see many parents may not be fair about pregnancy though especially if they are very religious. They will say "I did not do that" when teh reality is that they really did.
I say yes, let the parents know, AFTER the child's made the decision. While the decision IS the child's, under 18, they're still under their parents' jurisdiction and care. The parents should know what the hell's going on, but let the kid make their own decision please. We're not as stupid as you think.

This may lead to the damage of the child by abusive parents, or even worse abandonment.
The parents may want to know, but they may be rightwing hyperconservative fundie assholes. Sadly the US doesn't make sure to sterilize that population of americans.

Post by **The Yosemite Bear** » 2003-06-28 03:43am

Also I know two "Girls" whose mothers took drastic steps to prevent them from getting abortions, when they were RAPED. Grr. In one case the whole Church community shunned her for being raped by her Stepfather!

NapoleonGH · Post by **NapoleonGH** » 2003-06-28 03:29pm

so long as an under 18 year old's parents are required to be notified of all other medical treatment (as they are, a doctor cannot even give someone under 18 a shot without parental consent) yes the parents should be notififed and like all other medical treatment the parents should once again be the ones who actually make the call.

So long as we keep our current rules towards minors the same as they are.

Alex Moon · Post by **Alex Moon** » 2003-06-28 06:09pm

Yes.

a) If they're under 18 their parents are required to approve most other medical procedures.
b) It's a health and safety issue, especially if the child is under 16. If a 13 year old needs an abortion, then that is something the parents need to know about. Chances are that the girl wasn't knocked up by the 13 year old boy down the block.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2003-06-28 07:56pm

Alex Moon wrote:Yes.

a) If they're under 18 their parents are required to approve most other medical procedures.
b) It's a health and safety issue, especially if the child is under 16. If a 13 year old needs an abortion, then that is something the parents need to know about. Chances are that the girl wasn't knocked up by the 13 year old boy down the block.

So patient-doctor confidentiality doesn't apply if you are under 18? Last time I checked it did.

In (a), parental approval isn't required to go to a womans clinic as they will take anyone who is asking for help.
In (b), that's fine, but the doctors cannot be the one to tell them. Chances are the 13 year old is going to tell the parents that something like that happened or the parents are going to be the ones to notice somethings wrong first, anyway. The patient in question themselves has to tell the parents.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2003-06-29 01:19am

I'll get flamed for this, but yes.

The parents have the right to know and probably should have to give consent as well in most circumstances.

Regardless of the morality of abortion, it is an elective invasive medical procedure that carries with it the same serious risk of harm or death as other such procedures do. For any other procedure of this type, parental consent is required in most states.

Why should abortion be any different?

As an aside, most jurisdictions that have consent and/or notification laws for minors also provide that the minor can petition a court for permission without notifying the parents. That way, if a girl has a fear of retribution or was actually made pregnant by a parent or guardian, she can still get an abortion without their knowledge.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-06-29 01:24am

I'm normally leaning to the left on issues like this, but in this case, I have to go with parental notification. Several points:

A minor child is not an adult, and parental notification occurs if they show up late for school! Notifying the parents if they have an abortion should be a no-brainer.
The argument that the parents might take it out on the child is rather questionable; by that logic, we shouldn't let the parents know about bad grades.
The child has already demonstrated a lack of judgement by getting knocked up in the first place. Therefore, I have considerable difficulty with the notion that the child is mature enough to make life decisions on her own with zero input from her family.

However, this doesn't mean the parents should get veto power.

nechronius · Post by **nechronius** » 2003-06-29 01:35am

Darth Wong wrote:I'm normally leaning to the left on issues like this, but in this case, I have to go with parental notification. Several points:
A minor child is not an adult, and parental notification occurs if they show up late for school! Notifying the parents if they have an abortion should be a no-brainer.

The argument that the parents might take it out on the child is rather questionable; by that logic, we shouldn't let the parents know about bad grades.

The child has already demonstrated a lack of judgement by getting knocked up in the first place. Therefore, I have considerable difficulty with the notion that the child is mature enough to make life decisions on her own with zero input from her family.
However, this doesn't mean the parents should get veto power.

A lack of judgement doesn't have an age limit. Maturity represented by an age number seems way too arbitrary for me.

However it's hard to argue when as pointed out, parents theoretically get informed that their child is getting bad grades. Parental responsibility is a whole 'nother can of worms.

I guess having been so independent from a very young age myself I have less sympathy for children who "screw up," which probably excludes me from being the right voice of reason for this particular argument. Wait, I think after starting in the contrary I just agreed with Wong. Aw fer chrissakes.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-06-29 01:40am

nechronius wrote:A lack of judgement doesn't have an age limit. Maturity represented by an age number seems way too arbitrary for me.

It's hardly perfect, but I don't see any better ideas out there. We have to set some kind of average delimiter for driving, voting, drinking, etc.

However it's hard to argue when as pointed out, parents theoretically get informed that their child is getting bad grades. Parental responsibility is a whole 'nother can of worms.

I guess having been so independent from a very young age myself I have less sympathy for children who "screw up," which probably excludes me from being the right voice of reason for this particular argument. Wait, I think after starting in the contrary I just agreed with Wong. Aw fer chrissakes.

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2003-06-29 02:21am

Let the parents know AFTER the abortion happened...

If you give parents veto power, young girls won't bother going to an abortion clinic. Instead, she'll huddle in some back alley and shove a coat hanger up her vagina. Ya think that's a better solution?

People will make mistakes. It's a fact of life. We should discourage the mistakes as much as possible, but we shouldn't make it impossible for a person to correct their mistakes.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-06-29 02:27am

SPOOFE wrote:Let the parents know AFTER the abortion happened...

If you give parents veto power, young girls won't bother going to an abortion clinic. Instead, she'll huddle in some back alley and shove a coat hanger up her vagina. Ya think that's a better solution?

Letting the parents know beforehand is not veto power. Do not commit the "complex question" fallacy.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-06-29 02:29am

It can be damn close, IMHO.

Crayz9000 · Post by **Crayz9000** » 2003-06-29 02:41am

The problem is that sometimes, you get parents who are stupid, controlling pricks.

Still, if a doctor is required to notify the parents for any other operation, an abortion should fall under the same rules. It's just another operation (loosely speaking).

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-06-29 02:52am

The only people who think minor children are capable of good judgement are other minor children. The rest of us were all minor children once. We remember what it was like, which is precisely why we don't think minor children have good judgement.

Are there stupid asshole parents? Absolutely. Are there fucking idiot children? Absolutely. But if you have to draw some line in the sand (which we do), then you must recognize that minor children do NOT have the freedom to run around and do whatever they want, because we have deemed that they lack the necessary judgement.

InnerBrat · Post by **InnerBrat** » 2003-06-29 07:20am

Glocksman wrote:Regardless of the morality of abortion, it is an elective invasive medical procedure that carries with it the same serious risk of harm or death as other such procedures do. For any other procedure of this type, parental consent is required in most states.

Surely that depends on the abortion procedure being used.
In many cases, abortion is merely a hormonal injection that induces miscarriage.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2003-06-29 11:55am

I was referring to D&C abortions.

In the case of hormone injections or RU486, I'd say that the consent laws should still apply. It's still an elective medical procedure being performed on a minor.

Parents have the right to be informed of any medical procedures being performed on their minor aged children.

I would also say that parents have the right to deny a minor aged child an abortion (unless it's a life threatening situation). A minor can't legally set up wart removal surgery or a tonsillectomy on their own, why should abortion be any different?

Here's the general medical consent law for my state:

Consent to own health care; minors
Sec. 3. (a) Except as provided in subsections (b) and (c), unless incapable of consenting under section 4 of this chapter, an individual may consent to the individual's own health care if the individual is:
(1) an adult; or
(2) a minor and:
(A) is emancipated;
(B) is:
(i) at least fourteen (14) years of age;
(ii) not dependent on a parent for support;
(iii) living apart from the minor's parents or from an individual in loco parentis; and
(iv) managing the minor's own affairs;
(C) is or has been married;
(D) is in the military service of the United States; or
(E) is authorized to consent to the health care by any other statute.
(b) A person at least seventeen (17) years of age is eligible to donate blood in a voluntary and noncompensatory blood program without obtaining parental permission.
(c) An individual who has, suspects that the individual has, or has been exposed to a venereal disease is competent to give consent for medical or hospital care or treatment of the individual.
As added by P.L.2-1993, SEC.19.

Here's the law on abortions for minors:

IC 16-34-2-4
Written consent of parent or guardian of unemancipated pregnant woman under 18 years of age; conditions of waiver; representation by attorney; appeal; confidential records; emergency abortions
Sec. 4. (a) No physician shall perform an abortion on an unemancipated pregnant woman less than eighteen (18) years of age without first having obtained the written consent of one (1) of the parents or the legal guardian of the minor pregnant woman.
(b) A minor:
(1) who objects to having to obtain the written consent of her parent or legal guardian under this section; or
(2) whose parent or legal guardian refuses to consent to an abortion;
may petition, on her own behalf or by next friend, the juvenile court for a waiver of the parental consent requirement under subsection (a).
(c) A physician who feels that compliance with the parental consent requirement in subsection (a) would have an adverse effect on the welfare of the pregnant minor or on her pregnancy may petition the juvenile court within twenty-four (24) hours of the abortion request for a waiver of the parental consent requirement under subsection (a).
(d) The juvenile court must rule on a petition filed by a pregnant minor under subsection (b) or by her physician under subsection (c) within forty-eight (48) hours of the filing of the petition. Before ruling on the petition, the court shall consider the concerns expressed by the pregnant minor and her physician. The requirement of parental consent under this section shall be waived by the juvenile court if the court finds that the minor is mature enough to make the abortion decision independently or that an abortion would be in the minor's best interests.
(e) Unless the juvenile court finds that the pregnant minor is already represented by an attorney, the juvenile court shall appoint an attorney to represent the pregnant minor in a waiver proceeding brought by the minor under subsection (b) and on any appeals. The cost of legal representation appointed for the minor under this section shall be paid by the county.
(f) A minor or her physician who desires to appeal an adverse judgment of the juvenile court in a waiver proceeding under subsection (b) or (c) is entitled to an expedited appeal, under rules to be adopted by the supreme court.
(g) All records of the juvenile court and of the supreme court or the court of appeals that are made as a result of proceedings conducted under this section are confidential.
(h) A minor who initiates legal proceedings under this section is exempt from the payment of filing fees.
(i) This section shall not apply where there is an emergency need for a medical procedure to be performed such that continuation of the pregnancy provides an immediate threat and grave risk to the life or health of the pregnant woman and the attending physician so certifies in writing.

The law establishes a means to have one performed if parental consent causes a serious problem, such as when one has been assaulted by a family member. It seems a reasonable compromise between the parents' right to know and consent to medical procedures being performed on their minor aged child and the health and well being of a minor who needs an abortion for the gravest of reasons.

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2003-06-29 04:27pm

Letting the parents know beforehand is not veto power. Do not commit the "complex question" fallacy.

Sorry, those were two unrelated thoughts.