Excellent. It seems we are agreement over what we want accomplished, just not necessarily over the means.
I don't think the boyfriend or his family should have anything to do with it. But a trained psychologist is more than a government bureaucrat: s/he has a good understanding of all the options available and can grasp how each can impact the child after an assessment. I'm not saying that the counsellor should make the decision, but I think it should be mandatory that the teen and the parents meet with one before anyone makes a decision.
I know parents mean well, but it is difficult to separate your values, desires, plans for the future, expectations, etc, from what the child may want. For example, a staunchly Catholic parent may forbid abortion, while the teen has already been accepted into an Ivy League and intends to continue her education. Having the child will definitely postpone, if not cancel, her education plans. One may argue that she should have thought twice about having unprotected sex, but the truth is that sometimes condoms break or birth control fails (and this may well happen to a responsible 35-year old - the difference is that the 35-year old is able to act in her own best interest). In this case, I think it would be sad for a promising youngster's development to be halted in order to accomodate the parents' beliefs (especially that her future is compromised for the sake of a bundle of cells, which may or may not become a fully functioning human being).
And let's not forget that the law does not discriminate between a 12-year old and a 17 1/2-year old. Yes, they are both minors, but the latter should have a much better ability to decide what she wants. So I think that should be taken into account and the law applied differently by age category.
Notification law cut teen abortions
Notification law cut teen abortions
The power of MEOW
-
Adam Zapple
- Posts: 977
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 3:13 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
RedGlitter wrote: That just cuts down on abortion
And we all know that's a bad thing.
I think you are making two erroneous assumptions. One, that the teen will want to abort and two, that the parents won't let her. I don't think parental notification necessarily means no abortion. It just means her parents are aware and/or consent. Judging from the responses in this thread, many parents would allow their teens to have an abortion. And there are plenty of teen girls who want to have babies. So your assumptions just seem to be off base to me. Parents should be involved in such an important, and potentially dangerous, decision. I'm not suggesting that they have to come to the conclusion I may personally prefer them to come to but they need to be involved. You seem to be promoting only abortion and opposing any parental interference to that end. Am I wrong?
And we all know that's a bad thing.
I think you are making two erroneous assumptions. One, that the teen will want to abort and two, that the parents won't let her. I don't think parental notification necessarily means no abortion. It just means her parents are aware and/or consent. Judging from the responses in this thread, many parents would allow their teens to have an abortion. And there are plenty of teen girls who want to have babies. So your assumptions just seem to be off base to me. Parents should be involved in such an important, and potentially dangerous, decision. I'm not suggesting that they have to come to the conclusion I may personally prefer them to come to but they need to be involved. You seem to be promoting only abortion and opposing any parental interference to that end. Am I wrong?
-
Adam Zapple
- Posts: 977
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 3:13 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
Felinessa wrote: I'm not saying that the counsellor should make the decision, but I think it should be mandatory that the teen and the parents meet with one before anyone makes a decision..
Right, the teen and the parents, that's what I'm saying.
Right, the teen and the parents, that's what I'm saying.
-
Adam Zapple
- Posts: 977
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 3:13 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
RedGlitter wrote: Mmhmm. They should but they don't always.
Can you provide an example? I mean of a consent law that actually passed the legislature and constitutional muster without those provisions - you know a standing law that is actually on the books.
Can you provide an example? I mean of a consent law that actually passed the legislature and constitutional muster without those provisions - you know a standing law that is actually on the books.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
I think it's interesting that, without exception, those that are against parental notification - or to phrase it another way, those that wish to forcibly remove parental responsibility - keep talking about parents stopping abortions. Turn the situation around and examine it. If the 12-year-old insists on having the baby, against the wishes and advice of the parents, psychologists, Planned Parenthood, et al you would involve, would you support the child's decision?
I'd love for one of you to address this type situation, rather than saying something like "but that's not how it usually is" or some such tripe.
I'd love for one of you to address this type situation, rather than saying something like "but that's not how it usually is" or some such tripe.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
Felinessa wrote: We've been talking a lot about the parents' rights over the children. Sure, since the minor is your responsibility, you should have certain rights. But there is a major difference between deciding to not allow a kid to go on a school trip and deciding to force a kid to keep her baby. The first decision is not life-altering; the second one is. [...]Having sex is life-altering. Becoming pregnant is life-altering. Having a child is life-altering. Having an abortion is life-altering. Keeping the child is life-altering, as is giving the child up for adoption.
You can't get away from the life-altering effects of the situation. Why on earth would you want to saddle such a heavy burden on a child, when it is the parents' right, responsibility, and privilege to make such decisions?
Y'know, moving to a different town and sending a kid to a different school is life-altering as well. Should the child have veto power over that as well?
You can't get away from the life-altering effects of the situation. Why on earth would you want to saddle such a heavy burden on a child, when it is the parents' right, responsibility, and privilege to make such decisions?
Y'know, moving to a different town and sending a kid to a different school is life-altering as well. Should the child have veto power over that as well?
-
charles_r51
- Posts: 350
- Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 10:24 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
Felinessa wrote: Note: this post is not aimed at anyone in particular, but drawing on a variety of responses.
We've been talking a lot about the parents' rights over the children. Sure, since the minor is your responsibility, you should have certain rights. But there is a major difference between deciding to not allow a kid to go on a school trip and deciding to force a kid to keep her baby. The first decision is not life-altering; the second one is. And the truth is that your kid will have to live with YOUR decision for the rest of her life, which in most cases extends far beyond the 18 years you are responsible for her. This is exactly what would make abortion a reasonable exception from parental consent. For anything else, trips, parties, even marriage, she can safely wait a few years without consequences. But an unwanted baby can't be given back when she is 18. And even if it is placed for adoption, the emotional toll this may take on her can't be given back either.
So I'm with those who suggested that parental influence should be paired with objective counselling, while leaving the final decision to the pregnant girl. While responsible parents who consider the child's best interest first may be the majority, there are many others who are abusive and neglectful, or who put their own beliefs ahead. And since they do not represent an easily neglected percentage, it is dangerous to allow their children to slip through the cracks. After all, if a parent is responsible, caring, and has a good relationship with his/her pregnant child, the child is likely to consider her parent's opinion anyway. Do you need the law to compensate for your own parenting mistakes and lack of a trusting relationship with your children? If you do, then perhaps you are not in that responsible, caring category.
i aree with most of your sentiments. however many factors are involved in the argument and someone is bound to raise them, but not me. i'll just put this puppy to rest and say no more.:-4 :-4 :-4 :-4
We've been talking a lot about the parents' rights over the children. Sure, since the minor is your responsibility, you should have certain rights. But there is a major difference between deciding to not allow a kid to go on a school trip and deciding to force a kid to keep her baby. The first decision is not life-altering; the second one is. And the truth is that your kid will have to live with YOUR decision for the rest of her life, which in most cases extends far beyond the 18 years you are responsible for her. This is exactly what would make abortion a reasonable exception from parental consent. For anything else, trips, parties, even marriage, she can safely wait a few years without consequences. But an unwanted baby can't be given back when she is 18. And even if it is placed for adoption, the emotional toll this may take on her can't be given back either.
So I'm with those who suggested that parental influence should be paired with objective counselling, while leaving the final decision to the pregnant girl. While responsible parents who consider the child's best interest first may be the majority, there are many others who are abusive and neglectful, or who put their own beliefs ahead. And since they do not represent an easily neglected percentage, it is dangerous to allow their children to slip through the cracks. After all, if a parent is responsible, caring, and has a good relationship with his/her pregnant child, the child is likely to consider her parent's opinion anyway. Do you need the law to compensate for your own parenting mistakes and lack of a trusting relationship with your children? If you do, then perhaps you are not in that responsible, caring category.
i aree with most of your sentiments. however many factors are involved in the argument and someone is bound to raise them, but not me. i'll just put this puppy to rest and say no more.:-4 :-4 :-4 :-4
-
charles_r51
- Posts: 350
- Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 10:24 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
Accountable wrote: Having sex is life-altering. Becoming pregnant is life-altering. Having a child is life-altering. Having an abortion is life-altering. Keeping the child is life-altering, as is giving the child up for adoption.
You can't get away from the life-altering effects of the situation. Why on earth would you want to saddle such a heavy burden on a child, when it is the parents' right, responsibility, and privilege to make such decisions?
Y'know, moving to a different town and sending a kid to a different school is life-altering as well. Should the child have veto power over that as well?
no decision is a non life-altering decision. whatever decision is made, even whether to wear aparticular pair of shoes is a life altering decision. that being the case, what does it matter to another person what decision is made? none wharsoever. that person doesn't have to make the decision, doesn't have to justify the decision, and doesn't have to live the rest of that person's life with the decision. dis=liking a particular decision is no justification for denying anyone the right to make the decision for themselves. were that the case, we would deny the right of free will, and the responsibility that goes with it.:-4 :-4 :-4 :-4
You can't get away from the life-altering effects of the situation. Why on earth would you want to saddle such a heavy burden on a child, when it is the parents' right, responsibility, and privilege to make such decisions?
Y'know, moving to a different town and sending a kid to a different school is life-altering as well. Should the child have veto power over that as well?
no decision is a non life-altering decision. whatever decision is made, even whether to wear aparticular pair of shoes is a life altering decision. that being the case, what does it matter to another person what decision is made? none wharsoever. that person doesn't have to make the decision, doesn't have to justify the decision, and doesn't have to live the rest of that person's life with the decision. dis=liking a particular decision is no justification for denying anyone the right to make the decision for themselves. were that the case, we would deny the right of free will, and the responsibility that goes with it.:-4 :-4 :-4 :-4
-
charles_r51
- Posts: 350
- Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 10:24 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
Accountable wrote: I think it's interesting that, without exception, those that are against parental notification - or to phrase it another way, those that wish to forcibly remove parental responsibility - keep talking about parents stopping abortions. Turn the situation around and examine it. If the 12-year-old insists on having the baby, against the wishes and advice of the parents, psychologists, Planned Parenthood, et al you would involve, would you support the child's decision?
I'd love for one of you to address this type situation, rather than saying something like "but that's not how it usually is" or some such tripe.
parental notification is one thing,the decision to have an abortion is another. don't equate the two. the decision is one which must be lived with, and parents don't always look at it in that way, but in how much embarrassment the new child will cause them. what about the pregnant teen? should she be forced to carry or abort just because the parents want to? she had the sex, she has to accept the consequences of her actions, or in the rare case, put the blame where it belongs. it is her body, don't forget.:-4 :-4 :-4 :-4
I'd love for one of you to address this type situation, rather than saying something like "but that's not how it usually is" or some such tripe.
parental notification is one thing,the decision to have an abortion is another. don't equate the two. the decision is one which must be lived with, and parents don't always look at it in that way, but in how much embarrassment the new child will cause them. what about the pregnant teen? should she be forced to carry or abort just because the parents want to? she had the sex, she has to accept the consequences of her actions, or in the rare case, put the blame where it belongs. it is her body, don't forget.:-4 :-4 :-4 :-4
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
charles_r51 wrote: no decision is a non life-altering decision. whatever decision is made, even whether to wear aparticular pair of shoes is a life altering decision. that being the case, what does it matter to another person what decision is made? none wharsoever. that person doesn't have to make the decision, doesn't have to justify the decision, and doesn't have to live the rest of that person's life with the decision. dis=liking a particular decision is no justification for denying anyone the right to make the decision for themselves. were that the case, we would deny the right of free will, and the responsibility that goes with it.:-4 :-4 :-4 :-4In a family, anyone's decision impacts the lives of the others. You do realize this is in the context of a child making the decision, right?
-
charles_r51
- Posts: 350
- Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 10:24 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
Accountable wrote: In a family, anyone's decision impacts the lives of the others. You do realize this is in the context of a child making the decision, right?
any decision made within a family structure affects the family as a whole. but who is really making the decision? not all parents make decisions for the interests of the child, but for themselves.:-4 :-4 :-4 :-4
any decision made within a family structure affects the family as a whole. but who is really making the decision? not all parents make decisions for the interests of the child, but for themselves.:-4 :-4 :-4 :-4
Notification law cut teen abortions
Accountable, I would say that the burden should depend on the age of the teen. If she's 12, in my eyes that's not exactly a teen, although pop culture would have us think otherwise. If she's 17, I think she's more than capable of making the decision, burden and all. So while I would be in support of a young teen's decision having to be backed by the parents' decision, I don't think anyone over 16 should be subjected to the law.
The reason so many of us are uncomfortable with the parent notification law is not because of the notification part. If I had a kid, of course I'd want to KNOW. It's the assent part that bothers me. And I can't help but noticing that the law seems to be thriving exactly in anti-choice states, so it's not that difficult to connect the dots between parental assent and limiting abortion. After all, it's not a law which asks that parents should supervise what happens to the baby in the general: it's a law which asks that parents should decide whether or not an abortion should happen. It may sound the same, but the fact it zeroes in on abortion tells me that it aims to limit it.
Don't get me wrong, it's a good thing when abortion drops. But I'd to know that abortion rates drop because teen pregnancies drop as well, not because some girls are forced into a miserable motherhood they are not prepared for.
The reason so many of us are uncomfortable with the parent notification law is not because of the notification part. If I had a kid, of course I'd want to KNOW. It's the assent part that bothers me. And I can't help but noticing that the law seems to be thriving exactly in anti-choice states, so it's not that difficult to connect the dots between parental assent and limiting abortion. After all, it's not a law which asks that parents should supervise what happens to the baby in the general: it's a law which asks that parents should decide whether or not an abortion should happen. It may sound the same, but the fact it zeroes in on abortion tells me that it aims to limit it.
Don't get me wrong, it's a good thing when abortion drops. But I'd to know that abortion rates drop because teen pregnancies drop as well, not because some girls are forced into a miserable motherhood they are not prepared for.
The power of MEOW
-
charles_r51
- Posts: 350
- Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 10:24 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
Felinessa wrote: Accountable, I would say that the burden should depend on the age of the teen. If she's 12, in my eyes that's not exactly a teen, although pop culture would have us think otherwise. If she's 17, I think she's more than capable of making the decision, burden and all. So while I would be in support of a young teen's decision having to be backed by the parents' decision, I don't think anyone over 16 should be subjected to the law.
The reason so many of us are uncomfortable with the parent notification law is not because of the notification part. If I had a kid, of course I'd want to KNOW. It's the assent part that bothers me. And I can't help but noticing that the law seems to be thriving exactly in anti-choice states, so it's not that difficult to connect the dots between parental assent and limiting abortion. After all, it's not a law which asks that parents should supervise what happens to the baby in the general: it's a law which asks that parents should decide whether or not an abortion should happen. It may sound the same, but the fact it zeroes in on abortion tells me that it aims to limit it.
Don't get me wrong, it's a good thing when abortion drops. But I'd to know that abortion rates drop because teen pregnancies drop as well, not because some girls are forced into a miserable motherhood they are not prepared for.
i have a total abhorance of taking a life, but just becuse i'm agaimnst it don't think i'm anti-choice. i'm not. the best method to lower the abortion rate, regardless of age or circumstance is knowledge. many of thge states which would eliminate it, are also against any kind of instruction about the biggest factor, sex itself. no one gets pregnant without some idea of what causes it, but keeping kids, or adults for that matter, ignorant does nothing to solve the problem. there is nothing which could increase the rate of pregnancy than not knowing anything, or the inability to find out about it. it isn't abortion that is so bad as the attempts to prevent an education about the results of conduct. ignorance is powerful force, but knowledge is the one thing that puts ignorance in the trash where it belongs. and it is knowledge which scares people most.:-4 :-4 :-4 :-4
The reason so many of us are uncomfortable with the parent notification law is not because of the notification part. If I had a kid, of course I'd want to KNOW. It's the assent part that bothers me. And I can't help but noticing that the law seems to be thriving exactly in anti-choice states, so it's not that difficult to connect the dots between parental assent and limiting abortion. After all, it's not a law which asks that parents should supervise what happens to the baby in the general: it's a law which asks that parents should decide whether or not an abortion should happen. It may sound the same, but the fact it zeroes in on abortion tells me that it aims to limit it.
Don't get me wrong, it's a good thing when abortion drops. But I'd to know that abortion rates drop because teen pregnancies drop as well, not because some girls are forced into a miserable motherhood they are not prepared for.
i have a total abhorance of taking a life, but just becuse i'm agaimnst it don't think i'm anti-choice. i'm not. the best method to lower the abortion rate, regardless of age or circumstance is knowledge. many of thge states which would eliminate it, are also against any kind of instruction about the biggest factor, sex itself. no one gets pregnant without some idea of what causes it, but keeping kids, or adults for that matter, ignorant does nothing to solve the problem. there is nothing which could increase the rate of pregnancy than not knowing anything, or the inability to find out about it. it isn't abortion that is so bad as the attempts to prevent an education about the results of conduct. ignorance is powerful force, but knowledge is the one thing that puts ignorance in the trash where it belongs. and it is knowledge which scares people most.:-4 :-4 :-4 :-4
-
Adam Zapple
- Posts: 977
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 3:13 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
I'm hearing a lot of comments about which states have parental notification and why they have them and how those states are against health instructions, etc, etc. but no one is providing any specific examples. Give me the state and the laws they have enacted to back up these claims; otherwise it's just hearsay.
This is interesting though (from Netscape news bulletin):
"In the event of an unintended teen pregnancy, giving birth is better for teenagers than abortion. A study conducted by BGSU (Bowling Green State University) research psychologist Dr. Priscilla Coleman determined that abortion can cause severe mental health problems in young women."
I'm looking for a link to the study itself or a summary of the study, if I find it I'll post it.
This is interesting though (from Netscape news bulletin):
"In the event of an unintended teen pregnancy, giving birth is better for teenagers than abortion. A study conducted by BGSU (Bowling Green State University) research psychologist Dr. Priscilla Coleman determined that abortion can cause severe mental health problems in young women."
I'm looking for a link to the study itself or a summary of the study, if I find it I'll post it.
-
charles_r51
- Posts: 350
- Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 10:24 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
Adam Zapple wrote: I'm hearing a lot of comments about which states have parental notification and why they have them and how those states are against health instructions, etc, etc. but no one is providing any specific examples. Give me the state and the laws they have enacted to back up these claims; otherwise it's just hearsay.
This is interesting though (from Netscape news bulletin):
"In the event of an unintended teen pregnancy, giving birth is better for teenagers than abortion. A study conducted by BGSU (Bowling Green State University) research psychologist Dr. Priscilla Coleman determined that abortion can cause severe mental health problems in young women."
I'm looking for a link to the study itself or a summary of the study, if I find it I'll post it.
ihear of those states, but only in news reports when the controversy arises in court. as i'm not a lawyer i don't follow them very much. i do know they're there, but cannot give a specific one as it has been some time since i've heard about the matter in the local news.
as for the doctor's study, i'll wait for your post. it may be that she is speaking from personal experience, and the opinions are suspect.:-4 :-4 :-4
This is interesting though (from Netscape news bulletin):
"In the event of an unintended teen pregnancy, giving birth is better for teenagers than abortion. A study conducted by BGSU (Bowling Green State University) research psychologist Dr. Priscilla Coleman determined that abortion can cause severe mental health problems in young women."
I'm looking for a link to the study itself or a summary of the study, if I find it I'll post it.
ihear of those states, but only in news reports when the controversy arises in court. as i'm not a lawyer i don't follow them very much. i do know they're there, but cannot give a specific one as it has been some time since i've heard about the matter in the local news.
as for the doctor's study, i'll wait for your post. it may be that she is speaking from personal experience, and the opinions are suspect.:-4 :-4 :-4
Notification law cut teen abortions
Why, Adam, Texas, of course.
On top of the parental notification law, there is the limited explicit consent clause regarding contraception: Minor explicitly allowed to consent in limited circumstances (such as if married, a parent, pregnant or older than a specified age). Also, no state funds may be used to provide minors with confidential contraceptive services.
The absurdity of the situation lies in this part: a parent or pregnant. Why would someone pregnant require contraceptives? And why should explicit consent be available only to those who already made the mistake? Ridiculous.
Also, if you look at the chart below, you'll see that many of the parental consent states have the limited explicit consent clause (LMC). Not all, some allow minors to get their own contraception, and that's a good thing. If it were up to me, I'd put every penny into prevention, because preaching abstinence and cloaking sex in a shroud of mystery and sin has proven tragically ineffective.
Chart
On top of the parental notification law, there is the limited explicit consent clause regarding contraception: Minor explicitly allowed to consent in limited circumstances (such as if married, a parent, pregnant or older than a specified age). Also, no state funds may be used to provide minors with confidential contraceptive services.
The absurdity of the situation lies in this part: a parent or pregnant. Why would someone pregnant require contraceptives? And why should explicit consent be available only to those who already made the mistake? Ridiculous.
Also, if you look at the chart below, you'll see that many of the parental consent states have the limited explicit consent clause (LMC). Not all, some allow minors to get their own contraception, and that's a good thing. If it were up to me, I'd put every penny into prevention, because preaching abstinence and cloaking sex in a shroud of mystery and sin has proven tragically ineffective.
Chart
The power of MEOW
-
charles_r51
- Posts: 350
- Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 10:24 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
Felinessa wrote: Why, Adam, Texas, of course.
On top of the parental notification law, there is the limited explicit consent clause regarding contraception: Minor explicitly allowed to consent in limited circumstances (such as if married, a parent, pregnant or older than a specified age). Also, no state funds may be used to provide minors with confidential contraceptive services.
The absurdity of the situation lies in this part: a parent or pregnant. Why would someone pregnant require contraceptives? And why should explicit consent be available only to those who already made the mistake? Ridiculous.
Also, if you look at the chart below, you'll see that many of the parental consent states have the limited explicit consent clause (LMC). Not all, some allow minors to get their own contraception, and that's a good thing. If it were up to me, I'd put every penny into prevention, because preaching abstinence and cloaking sex in a shroud of mystery and sin has proven tragically ineffective.
Chart
i guess the old adage ignorance is bliss is still held in high regard. that seems to be what many of the states are trying to get back to. then they'll be able to justify the opening of back street abortion clinics.:-4 :-4 :-4
On top of the parental notification law, there is the limited explicit consent clause regarding contraception: Minor explicitly allowed to consent in limited circumstances (such as if married, a parent, pregnant or older than a specified age). Also, no state funds may be used to provide minors with confidential contraceptive services.
The absurdity of the situation lies in this part: a parent or pregnant. Why would someone pregnant require contraceptives? And why should explicit consent be available only to those who already made the mistake? Ridiculous.
Also, if you look at the chart below, you'll see that many of the parental consent states have the limited explicit consent clause (LMC). Not all, some allow minors to get their own contraception, and that's a good thing. If it were up to me, I'd put every penny into prevention, because preaching abstinence and cloaking sex in a shroud of mystery and sin has proven tragically ineffective.
Chart
i guess the old adage ignorance is bliss is still held in high regard. that seems to be what many of the states are trying to get back to. then they'll be able to justify the opening of back street abortion clinics.:-4 :-4 :-4
-
RedGlitter
- Posts: 15777
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
Stupid invasive laws will not stop abortion. Wisewomen for centuries have known what to use to terminate a pregnancy. Things made by God and put there for a reason. A regular nurse taken aside can tell you what to do or use. Pregnancy and childbirth will ALWAYS be a woman's domain and the men should put up and shut up. They get to play, they can pay. Stop whining about who lied about birth control- where was your rubber then?! What responsibility were you taking? What? You were depending on her and you got screwed- pardon the pun? Oh well!
This idea that children are parental chattel is obnoxious. Comparing field trip permission slips with abortion consent is stupid. Once that girl is pregnant she stops being a kid. Period. So she has to make some tough decisions and ,ay regret them later. Too bad. We all do that. And oarents who want to protect their 17 year old from abortion because "they know better" are all to fast to boot their @$$ out the door when they turn 18 so what is one more year? We all grow up, some of us harder than others but let people have their own rights and stop calling this everything but what it is- parental CONTROL.
This idea that children are parental chattel is obnoxious. Comparing field trip permission slips with abortion consent is stupid. Once that girl is pregnant she stops being a kid. Period. So she has to make some tough decisions and ,ay regret them later. Too bad. We all do that. And oarents who want to protect their 17 year old from abortion because "they know better" are all to fast to boot their @$$ out the door when they turn 18 so what is one more year? We all grow up, some of us harder than others but let people have their own rights and stop calling this everything but what it is- parental CONTROL.
-
charles_r51
- Posts: 350
- Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 10:24 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
RedGlitter wrote: Stupid invasive laws will not stop abortion. Wisewomen for centuries have known what to use to terminate a pregnancy. Things made by God and put there for a reason. A regular nurse taken aside can tell you what to do or use. Pregnancy and childbirth will ALWAYS be a woman's domain and the men should put up and shut up. They get to play, they can pay. Stop whining about who lied about birth control- where was your rubber then?! What responsibility were you taking? What? You were depending on her and you got screwed- pardon the pun? Oh well!
This idea that children are parental chattel is obnoxious. Comparing field trip permission slips with abortion consent is stupid. Once that girl is pregnant she stops being a kid. Period. So she has to make some tough decisions and ,ay regret them later. Too bad. We all do that. And oarents who want to protect their 17 year old from abortion because "they know better" are all to fast to boot their @$$ out the door when they turn 18 so what is one more year? We all grow up, some of us harder than others but let people have their own rights and stop calling this everything but what it is- parental CONTROL.
no reason to be angry. i know what the whole thing is and it isn't parental control at stake but religious intolerance for something that is personal and private. it is just a simple matter of who gets to make you do what is good for them, and to hell with what the individual wants. if you don't believe me, read about the whole issue and who wants you to do what based on whose belief. it isn't about morality, but about whose morality is more powerful politically.:-4 :-4 :-4
This idea that children are parental chattel is obnoxious. Comparing field trip permission slips with abortion consent is stupid. Once that girl is pregnant she stops being a kid. Period. So she has to make some tough decisions and ,ay regret them later. Too bad. We all do that. And oarents who want to protect their 17 year old from abortion because "they know better" are all to fast to boot their @$$ out the door when they turn 18 so what is one more year? We all grow up, some of us harder than others but let people have their own rights and stop calling this everything but what it is- parental CONTROL.
no reason to be angry. i know what the whole thing is and it isn't parental control at stake but religious intolerance for something that is personal and private. it is just a simple matter of who gets to make you do what is good for them, and to hell with what the individual wants. if you don't believe me, read about the whole issue and who wants you to do what based on whose belief. it isn't about morality, but about whose morality is more powerful politically.:-4 :-4 :-4
-
RedGlitter
- Posts: 15777
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
I'm only angry at the issue, not at anyone in particular. 
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
RedGlitter wrote: Stupid invasive laws will not stop abortion. Wisewomen for centuries have known what to use to terminate a pregnancy. Things made by God and put there for a reason. A regular nurse taken aside can tell you what to do or use.Agreed!
RedGlitter wrote: Pregnancy and childbirth will ALWAYS be a woman's domain and the men should put up and shut up.taxation without representation?
RedGlitter wrote: They get to play, they can pay. Stop whining about who lied about birth control- where was your rubber then?! What responsibility were you taking? What? You were depending on her and you got screwed- pardon the pun? Oh well! Agreed!
RedGlitter wrote: This idea that children are parental chattel is obnoxious. Comparing field trip permission slips with abortion consent is stupid.Agreed!
RedGlitter wrote: Once that girl is pregnant she stops being a kid. Period.Stupidest statement you've made yet. What? There's a maturity hormone that floods the body with all the rest??
RedGlitter wrote: Pregnancy and childbirth will ALWAYS be a woman's domain and the men should put up and shut up.taxation without representation?
RedGlitter wrote: They get to play, they can pay. Stop whining about who lied about birth control- where was your rubber then?! What responsibility were you taking? What? You were depending on her and you got screwed- pardon the pun? Oh well! Agreed!
RedGlitter wrote: This idea that children are parental chattel is obnoxious. Comparing field trip permission slips with abortion consent is stupid.Agreed!
RedGlitter wrote: Once that girl is pregnant she stops being a kid. Period.Stupidest statement you've made yet. What? There's a maturity hormone that floods the body with all the rest??
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
[quote=Accountable]I think it's interesting that, without exception, those that are against parental notification - or to phrase it another way, those that wish to forcibly remove parental responsibility - keep talking about parents stopping abortions. Turn the situation around and examine it. If the 12-year-old insists on having the baby, against the wishes and advice of the parents, psychologists, Planned Parenthood, et al you would involve, would you support the child's decision?
No one's willing to address this question?
No one's willing to address this question?
-
charles_r51
- Posts: 350
- Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 10:24 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
RedGlitter wrote: I'm only angry at the issue, not at anyone in particular.
anger at an issue solves nothing, anger due to an issue requires action to bring change, whatever side of the issue one is on.:-4 :-4 :-4
anger at an issue solves nothing, anger due to an issue requires action to bring change, whatever side of the issue one is on.:-4 :-4 :-4
-
charles_r51
- Posts: 350
- Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 10:24 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
Accountable wrote: [quote=Accountable]I think it's interesting that, without exception, those that are against parental notification - or to phrase it another way, those that wish to forcibly remove parental responsibility - keep talking about parents stopping abortions. Turn the situation around and examine it. If the 12-year-old insists on having the baby, against the wishes and advice of the parents, psychologists, Planned Parenthood, et al you would involve, would you support the child's decision?
No one's willing to address this question?
not unwilling to address it? isn't more likely they are afraid to address it? it isn't so much the child's wanting the baby, but whether the baby would be better off in a different environment, such as an adopted family. that is what the adult world is afraid of. letting a child have achild then sending it to some stranger without the natural mother's input.:-4 :-4 :-4
No one's willing to address this question?
not unwilling to address it? isn't more likely they are afraid to address it? it isn't so much the child's wanting the baby, but whether the baby would be better off in a different environment, such as an adopted family. that is what the adult world is afraid of. letting a child have achild then sending it to some stranger without the natural mother's input.:-4 :-4 :-4
-
Adam Zapple
- Posts: 977
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 3:13 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
Felinessa wrote: Why, Adam, Texas, of course.
On top of the parental notification law, there is the limited explicit consent clause regarding contraception: Minor explicitly allowed to consent in limited circumstances (such as if married, a parent, pregnant or older than a specified age). Also, no state funds may be used to provide minors with confidential contraceptive services.
The absurdity of the situation lies in this part: a parent or pregnant. Why would someone pregnant require contraceptives? And why should explicit consent be available only to those who already made the mistake? Ridiculous.
Also, if you look at the chart below, you'll see that many of the parental consent states have the limited explicit consent clause (LMC). Not all, some allow minors to get their own contraception, and that's a good thing. If it were up to me, I'd put every penny into prevention, because preaching abstinence and cloaking sex in a shroud of mystery and sin has proven tragically ineffective.
Chart
I appreciate the specifics. You mentioned several states that allow limited consent from minors including those that are married, a parent or pregnant. I think the reference to pregnant minors, from what I've read anyway, refers to teens that have been pregnant prior to seeking contraceptives. I may be wrong, but as you say it wouldn't make sense otherwise. Anyway, parental consent for contraceptives is not the same as "states which .... are also against any kind of instruction about .... sex itself". Allowing parental control over a minor health care is not the same as refusing instruction on sex.
On top of the parental notification law, there is the limited explicit consent clause regarding contraception: Minor explicitly allowed to consent in limited circumstances (such as if married, a parent, pregnant or older than a specified age). Also, no state funds may be used to provide minors with confidential contraceptive services.
The absurdity of the situation lies in this part: a parent or pregnant. Why would someone pregnant require contraceptives? And why should explicit consent be available only to those who already made the mistake? Ridiculous.
Also, if you look at the chart below, you'll see that many of the parental consent states have the limited explicit consent clause (LMC). Not all, some allow minors to get their own contraception, and that's a good thing. If it were up to me, I'd put every penny into prevention, because preaching abstinence and cloaking sex in a shroud of mystery and sin has proven tragically ineffective.
Chart
I appreciate the specifics. You mentioned several states that allow limited consent from minors including those that are married, a parent or pregnant. I think the reference to pregnant minors, from what I've read anyway, refers to teens that have been pregnant prior to seeking contraceptives. I may be wrong, but as you say it wouldn't make sense otherwise. Anyway, parental consent for contraceptives is not the same as "states which .... are also against any kind of instruction about .... sex itself". Allowing parental control over a minor health care is not the same as refusing instruction on sex.
-
charles_r51
- Posts: 350
- Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 10:24 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
Adam Zapple wrote: I appreciate the specifics. You mentioned several states that allow limited consent from minors including those that are married, a parent or pregnant. I think the reference to pregnant minors, from what I've read anyway, refers to teens that have been pregnant prior to seeking contraceptives. I may be wrong, but as you say it wouldn't make sense otherwise. Anyway, parental consent for contraceptives is not the same as "states which .... are also against any kind of instruction about .... sex itself". Allowing parental control over a minor health care is not the same as refusing instruction on sex.
parental control over health care. does that mean they decide whether a teen can get an abotion? notification already has a limiting effect, are you advocating that abortion should be a parental decision and not about the teens right to have one? i hope not, but if that is your stance, fine, but i cannot agree to it.:-4 :-4 :-4
parental control over health care. does that mean they decide whether a teen can get an abotion? notification already has a limiting effect, are you advocating that abortion should be a parental decision and not about the teens right to have one? i hope not, but if that is your stance, fine, but i cannot agree to it.:-4 :-4 :-4
-
Adam Zapple
- Posts: 977
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 3:13 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
charles_r51 wrote: are you advocating that abortion should be a parental decision and not about the teens right to have one?
It's not that cut-and-dried but essentially yes. But I think your assumption that parental notification or consent means no abortion is wrong. I believe in parental notification because it protects the minor from those who may not have her best interests at heart, and because abortion is a dangerous procedure and her parents need to be notified.
It's not that cut-and-dried but essentially yes. But I think your assumption that parental notification or consent means no abortion is wrong. I believe in parental notification because it protects the minor from those who may not have her best interests at heart, and because abortion is a dangerous procedure and her parents need to be notified.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
Obviously you haven't been paying attention, Adam. The consensus in this thread is that parents are the selfish bastards that don't have the child's best interests in mind. They only think of themselves. Only bureaucracies can possibly be so selfless. 
Notification law cut teen abortions
:rolleyes:
My candle's burning at both ends, it will not last the night. But ah, my foes, and oh, my friends--It gives a lovely light!--Edna St. Vincent Millay
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
Have we beaten this one to death? I think we have. I guess it can sit for awhile till somebody gets stirred up again.
-
charles_r51
- Posts: 350
- Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 10:24 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
Adam Zapple wrote: It's not that cut-and-dried but essentially yes. But I think your assumption that parental notification or consent means no abortion is wrong. I believe in parental notification because it protects the minor from those who may not have her best interests at heart, and because abortion is a dangerous procedure and her parents need to be notified.
but it is cut and dried, though not the parents. it is an out and out denial of the privacy of the teen, and the position of the anti-abortionist lobby to deny abortion one way or another. it doesn't matter who gets in trouble, abortion has to be stopped and parents are the suckers that have been chosen to stop it no matter what. any other reason is just what the anti-abortion lobby want you to think, but their plan is clear and woefully well on the way to stopping anyone from having an abortion no matter. as you should know, the lobby will stop at npthing, including murder, humiliation, and forced birth to get what they want. those are the facts and they cannot be denied.:-4 :-4 :-4
but it is cut and dried, though not the parents. it is an out and out denial of the privacy of the teen, and the position of the anti-abortionist lobby to deny abortion one way or another. it doesn't matter who gets in trouble, abortion has to be stopped and parents are the suckers that have been chosen to stop it no matter what. any other reason is just what the anti-abortion lobby want you to think, but their plan is clear and woefully well on the way to stopping anyone from having an abortion no matter. as you should know, the lobby will stop at npthing, including murder, humiliation, and forced birth to get what they want. those are the facts and they cannot be denied.:-4 :-4 :-4
-
RedGlitter
- Posts: 15777
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
charles_r51 wrote: it is an out and out denial of the privacy of the teen,
According to some parents I've heard, a teenager has no right to privacy. But I am in complete agreement with you on this.
According to some parents I've heard, a teenager has no right to privacy. But I am in complete agreement with you on this.
-
charles_r51
- Posts: 350
- Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 10:24 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
RedGlitter wrote: According to some parents I've heard, a teenager has no right to privacy. But I am in complete agreement with you on this.
many parents i've talked to also say that teens have no privacy, but many say they do. i may be mistaken, but i believe the courts are also divided on it. so the question seems to be in limbo when a teen is involved. mayhap things will change directions once the election is over, but i doubt it will, at least not in the forseeable future. :-4 :-4 :-4
i am of the opinion this thread is about exhausted. anyone else feel that way?
many parents i've talked to also say that teens have no privacy, but many say they do. i may be mistaken, but i believe the courts are also divided on it. so the question seems to be in limbo when a teen is involved. mayhap things will change directions once the election is over, but i doubt it will, at least not in the forseeable future. :-4 :-4 :-4
i am of the opinion this thread is about exhausted. anyone else feel that way?
-
RedGlitter
- Posts: 15777
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
charles_r51 wrote:
i am of the opinion this thread is about exhausted. anyone else feel that way?
I do. Unless something new comes up, I'll be seeing y'all in the other threads!
i am of the opinion this thread is about exhausted. anyone else feel that way?
I do. Unless something new comes up, I'll be seeing y'all in the other threads!
-
nvalleyvee
- Posts: 5191
- Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 8:57 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
Accountable wrote: Maybe they would if we held parents accountable for their responsibility. Teen sex is statutory rape. Parents are responsible for their kids' actions. If parents paid a consequence for not keeping control of their kids, maybe they'd pay more attention.
Now bring on the apologists.
I just have to comment here............did anyone at FG ever have unprotected sex in their teen years? What are you going to ACC......kepp all your teens housebound until marriage? You cannot control them...........So give them good birth control advice.........YES that means abstension!!!!!! Yes that means not doing drugs or alcohol so they do not lose control of what they feel is right..
What are you going to do after that? Trust and hope!!!!!!!!!!
Now bring on the apologists.
I just have to comment here............did anyone at FG ever have unprotected sex in their teen years? What are you going to ACC......kepp all your teens housebound until marriage? You cannot control them...........So give them good birth control advice.........YES that means abstension!!!!!! Yes that means not doing drugs or alcohol so they do not lose control of what they feel is right..
What are you going to do after that? Trust and hope!!!!!!!!!!
The growth of knowledge depends entirely on disagreement..........Karl R. Popper
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
nvalleyvee wrote: I just have to comment here............did anyone at FG ever have unprotected sex in their teen years? What are you going to ACC......kepp all your teens housebound until marriage? You cannot control them...........So give them good birth control advice.........YES that means abstension!!!!!! Yes that means not doing drugs or alcohol so they do not lose control of what they feel is right..
What are you going to do after that? Trust and hope!!!!!!!!!!Parents have a responsibility to their kids and society to raise responsible adults. You can't raise responsible adults by keeping them housebound until marriage; you have to teach them responsibility. Teaching them responsibility and allowing them limited freedom within your set boundaries in no way relieves the parent from full responsibility.
What are you going to do after that? Trust and hope!!!!!!!!!!Parents have a responsibility to their kids and society to raise responsible adults. You can't raise responsible adults by keeping them housebound until marriage; you have to teach them responsibility. Teaching them responsibility and allowing them limited freedom within your set boundaries in no way relieves the parent from full responsibility.
-
Adam Zapple
- Posts: 977
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 3:13 am
Notification law cut teen abortions
I informed my kids last night that I am implementing a "Don't ask, don't tell" policy to ensure their absolute right to privacy. I will no longer check to see if they done their homework, if they are eating right, or if they are practicing good hygiene. If their eyes glaze over I won't check to see if they are doing drugs since it's really none of my business. If they suddenly have new clothes, I won't check to see if they are shoplifting with their friends. If I've been a good friend to them, then they'll come to me with their problems, otherwise they always have their crack dealer to fall back on. We all know the crack dealer will give them good advice.