Brought to my attention in a Mere Commentary blog, I learned of Obama's opposition to parental notification laws concerning underage abortions and found myself entangled within a moral dilemma. Is it not the states moral right to enact laws that protect its youth? Further, is it not an absolute obligation of the state to aid parents, using checks and safeguards, by involving their participation within the life of their child? It seems commonsensical to require a 12 year old girl to receive parental notification and consent when receiving any medical procedure--especially when concerning abortion!
Dr. Charmaine Yoest, Americans United for Life President, shows the statistics with reference to this particular issue, stating,
"When the law required the notification of one parent, the rate decreased 13 percent. When the law required the consent of one parent, the rate decreased 19 percent. And when the law required the notification of both parents, the rate decreased 31 percent."
Statistically speaking, it would be outrageous to deny the importance of parental guidance within the issue of underage abortions. As a father of two daughters, I'd be shocked to believe Senator Obama would endorse such a law that would deny parents, like himself, the right to parent their underage children.
Posts
14 comments:
Claire makes a fine point. As a father of two young daughters and husband to a former hospital administrator, it is hard to believe Obama could ever staunchly stand behind such a law. This may be taking a women’s right to choose too far – after all, these are not women, but girls. It is one thing to dismiss parental involvement once the child has achieved adult legality (age 18), but entirely inappropriate and irresponsible in dealings with children.
The maturation levels of 12-, 16-, and even 18-year-olds are vastly different. To suggest that because a girl has reached sexual maturity (begun menstruation) she has also reached emotional or rational maturity (assuming these even exist!) is absurd. It does not take a Harvard education, a child of your own or a seat in the Senate to know that puberty does not give way to adulthood – much less the subsequent decision-making skills. Rather puberty, although it does intensify sexual urges and makes pregnancy possible, gives girls boobs, hips, and a new monthly inconvenience, not the capacity to imagine life with a child. Why would we even consider bestowing INDEPENDENT responsibility onto them?
Arguably, the focus needs to be on sex education. These budding-adults deserve access and education to be better able to make informed decisions, particularly over their sexuality, their bodies, and the lives of the unborn.
disagree with any pre-abortion notification requirement and/or parental consent statutes. While this issue brings much political arguments with it, the fact that if parents get to decide whether their daughter receives an abortion is quite unsettling. This is because abortion, no matter what the circumstances, is a very personal and life-altering issue. It is most likely that anyone seeking an abortion is in a less than ideal situation they unfortunately found themselves in. With parental notification and/or consent statutes, the question of an abortion seems to develop into a burden on the person wishing to receive an abortion. I firmly believe that, no matter the age, a person is fully capable of making the everlasting decision on what to do with their body. The issue of whether abortion is morally correct, or not, I am not arguing. I am arguing for individual autonomy at the point of birth.
In response to your arguments, I would strongly encourage you to check out the following website, which will introduce a perspective you have ignored. You operate from the stance that parental notification laws are an unequivocally good idea, and that is simply not the case:
http://www.reproductiverights.org/pub_fac_mandconsent.html
To sum up the argument briefly, parental notification laws typically do more harm than good in that they put young women who live in unsafe family situations in danger if they are forced to reveal their pregnancy to their family. Legislation cannot force good communication or "family values" and statistics show that the majority of young women voluntarily choose to inform their parents of their decision to seek an abortion. (http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html)
Laws mandating consent end up putting young women at risk.
This issue tends to be put in black and white terms, when in reality it is far more complex and deserving of careful consideration. There is more to be done if we really want to be able to help both young women, and their families.
I recognize your concerns Claire, especially coming from a parent. It seems completely reasonable that you want to have a say in your child’s choices. That being said, please try to appreciate my stance without feeling personally attacked.
It is not the role of the state to make up for poor parenting. If a child does not feel safe or comfortable coming to their parental figures for guidance, than there is a larger issue at hand within the family structure- a place where the law should not step. Furthermore, many states offer minors the opportunity to obtain birth control without parental consent. What message are we sending if we allow “children” the choice to engage in sex, but not the choice in regards to the outcome? Also, why should one parent’s rights outweigh those of another? Many that argue your position are in fact pro-life and therefore believe that life begins at conception. If the “fetus” to be aborted is in fact a fetus in your eyes, then is your child not a mother? Why should she not be allowed to dictate the path that she feels will be most beneficial to her child? My issue is not with the morality of “killing the child” but the issue of one mother dictating another mother’s rights. You deciding against an abortion does not make you the parent of that child and thus to me could very easily be viewed as forced motherhood- a practice many in the US despise in other cultures. Try to place yourself in the position of a scared 17 year old girl- perhaps home is a scary place and the prospect of anyone finding out is dangerous. We must consider other circumstances than those of middle-class America- where most abortions are not occurring. Perhaps the best way to protect the children is allow them a well guided choice and better the family as an institution.
I find myself torn on the issue, while I can see the point of parental notification, I can also see a girl’s right to choose in secrecy. While parents do want to know everything going on in there children’s lives, in some cases the girl may have to make the best decision for her, on her own. When it comes to notification I do think there should be an age limit. In the majority of states a female can consent to sex at age 16, so shouldn’t she also be able to make a decision about an abortion? And I wonder why the abortion rate is lower when parents are notified. Is it because their support allows the girls to have the baby, or is it because they are imposing their views on their child? And what is really in the best interest of the girl?
This issue is one that I find interesting. I have a problem with these parents having to be notified, because I feel that they should have had a more active role in their child’s life. Chances are that these young girls do not have the best relationship with their parents; if they do then they should feel comfortable telling their parents about the situation. Women should have the right to choose what happens with their body. However, the age of consent in a state should be the age when a young girl can decide for herself. If she is younger, I think the parents should be notified. At the same time, I feel that if these couples are making “adult” decisions, are they disqualified to make their own abortion decisions? There are other moral, religious, and state supported opinions out there and there is no universal correct answer. What is right for one young woman is not always right for the next and quite frankly this higher level of interaction from the government concerning abortion scares me.
I also find myself torn on this subject. I definitely agree with Morgan that a young girl is not legally independent of her parents. She must have parental consent for nearly everything she does and nearly every decision she makes. Why should this be any different, especially when it's a life-altering decision? Do young girls really have the capacity to know what's best for themselves?
Having said that, I think it's very hard to establish a legal age where you all of a sudden reach that maturity level. I know women who are 20 years old who shouldnt be able to make a single decision by themselves. Conversely, I know 16 and 17 year old women who could very well make that decision for themselves.
Also, there's a good chance that maturity level stems from the parenting received during the more formative years of a child's life. Trying to think from a parent's perspective, I wouldn't remotely consider my child capable of making such a decision without at least discussing it with me [the parent].
As tough as it is to say, I believe the state has the right to notify parents of underage women who want to get abortions. Legally, they are not really allowed to make their own decisions, and that's just kind of the way it is. Why not allow underage marriage without consent? Why not allow underage smoking? I understand those questions are different, but I think can be thrown into that same arena.
I think that this is a very sticky issue. I might want to first note that even though this blog is about religion as it pertains to law and politics, I'm not really sure this specific issue about abortion really has a specific or strong tie to religion(the original blogger certainly did not mention one), so I'm not really sure how it fits in this blog. To the issue though, I think the argument that there should be no notification because the child would voluntarily tell their parents unless they were "bad parents" falls on its face-it is very possible to have caring loving parents and still wind up a teenage pregnancy, and I think it says a great deal that this is the fallback argument. Further, the idea that because it is a personal and painful decision in no way means it is not one which outside actors could be helpful in, or that it could be made in haste or poorly thought out-how many can claim that they have made the right decision on every important decision in their life- especially in their first 15 years? I believe that parents still have an important role to play in a childs life, and from a strictly legal standpoint, a right to know before they undergo a MEDICAL PROCEDURE!
I would disagree with Tyler. There should most definitly be a parental notification statute in reference to abortion. If you are 'old enough' to get yourself into the mess of requiring an abortion, or so she may think, then you are plenty old enough to deal with the consequences of having to notify your parents, if not gain their permission. Without parental notification it is too easy for girls to make rash decisions that they will regret for the rest of their lives. If you aren't old enough to even take yourself to your doctor appointment at your pediatricians office without your parent present then you shouldnt be old enough to procure an abortion without notifying at least one parent. And if there is proof that abortion rates go down with the notification of at least one parent then that in itself is enough of a reason to require notification.
I agree with Jeremy on this issue and think that he brings up some good points. The state should have the right to notify parents if their underage child is trying to get an abortion. The children are under their parent’s guidance and influence on all other matters until they are eighteen years old. It is only at eighteen years old that they are considered an adult and capable to making these types of decisions.
I don’t think that young teens really fully understand the psychological impact that can occur from having an abortion. This really is a big decision that can be life altering for them. In order to make a good decision, a person must be aware as to consequences both physically/ emotionally of their actions, and all options available to them.
The law is set in place to protect the children who are under eighteen years old. It is also set in place to ensure that parent’s have a voice in matters regarding their children. Having this law guarantees a parent that that they have the right to guide their children on all issues until they are of age. This is a right that the parents have over their children, and should not be taken away because the issue is regarding their children.
I agree with the point that Jeremy brought up, which is that these women aren’t old enough to make many decisions at all, so why should this decision be an exception? I don’t think the argument about personal autonomy really flies on this issue, given the existence of laws that require a person to reach certain ages before they can drive, smoke, vote, consume alcohol, etc. From a legal standpoint, how can you legislate that a woman is mature enough to decide whether or not she has a life-changing medical procedure with simultaneously saying she is not mature enough to vote for the next president? Legally speaking, apart from any appeal to emotion or sentiment, it simply doesn’t make any sense to allow underage women to get abortions when they are legally prohibited from making other decisions. If the law it going to be consistent, then it needs to either allow these young women to make all decisions independently from their parents, or not to make any at all.
We are dealing with abortion as a Constitutional right of privacy. A woman has the right to determine whether or not to terminate her pregnancy. Parental notification should not be necessary for underage abortions because it violates the Constitutional rights of the potential mother. I understand the argument that children(18 and under) have many of their rights restricted but why should the parents have the ultimate decision when they only have to deal with the consequences for a couple of years? Isn't it fair to say that the majority of parents would not want their underage child to get an abortion? Mandating parental notification would force many unwanted births and a be a violation of the rights upheld in Roe v. Wade. It seems like feelings against abortion in general is leading some of these posts.
Whether you believe that abortion should be legal or not is not the point that I think Claire is putting forward. If Obama truly does want to reduce the number of abortions, it seems that he would vote for parental notification as we have seen it significantly reduced abortion rates. Beyond that, however, I fail to see the reasoning behind reducing the number of abortions when a person stands firm in the belief that abortion is a right that a woman has and there is nothing morally wrong with it. There seems to be a disconnect in logic here that I do not understand. If Sen. Obama is serious about reducing abortions, he should have taken measures to do so.
I think that, in your objection to Obama's vote to allow abortions without parental notification, one main focus is the fact that such a law would increase the number of abortions. I think pretty much every American wants fewer abortions, but there are two ways to go about meeting that goal. One is to prevent pregnant women from getting abortions, the other is to prevent women from getting pregnant in the first place. If the 12-year-olds in question had been educated about abstinence and contraception in the first place, then perhaps there would be no abortion to notify her parents about at all.
Post a Comment