Senate set to pass minors abortion bill

chopitdown

farfromglorified wrote:

That's fair -- I completely understand why you'd come to the opposite conclusion given a view that says a fetus's life stands on higher grounds than the mother's will. Such a thing is logically defensible, even though I don't necessarily agree with it.

I should clarify that I disagree on the fundamental right of a minor to get an abortion w/o notification of the mother. But the above is true as well.

farfromglorified wrote:

Legally this is strange though. The woman has a right to travel to another state without parental notification, but the accomplice does not. It's very odd. It's kind of like making bank robbery legal, but driving the getaway car illegal

It does pose a strange twist, but I think the intent of the law is to curtail abortions performed on teens unbeknownst to the parents. So they eliminated another avenue for this to occurr, or at least attempted to eliminate.

farfromglorified wrote:

Ethically, yes. I completely agree. In the concept of legality, however, I will respect the individual's will over the wishes of the parent. If we ignore the dischord on the definition of life vis a vis abortion as you suggest above, the individual is not harming another person, nor is the accomplice.

If a 16 year old gets AIDS, I would understand if they did not wish to inform their parents. And I think that minor should have the right to seek out treatment on his/her own, if that is his/her will. Again, no one is harmed by that situation. The same goes for a minor travelling across state lines to receive an abortion.

I would respect the will of individual once the individual has reached the age of majority. The reason we have parental notification / consent laws is to protect children from others and themselves. So what happens if the minor is injured while getting the abortion unbeknownst to the parents? Then someone is hurt. If the kids are still minors could the parents sue the physician for battery?

farfromglorified wrote:

Hehe...no. If any law is to be passed, it is a law against the child abuse. The fact that some minors will be abused within a chain of events is really irrelevant. You could pass a law against sex itself on the same logical ground.

Parents do not have a "fundamental right" to give consent for a minor to get a medical procedure. They have only a "fundamental right" to give consent for their own medical procedure. A child has a will separate from his/her parents'. A parent does not own the body of their child outside of the context of common ethics.

I'll only agree with you somewhat here. If a parent is forcing a child to get a medical procedure and the child doesn't want it, I would back the child 100%; however, if the child is wanting an elective procedure and the parents don't want them to, i would support the parents until said child is of the legal age of majority.

farfromglorified wrote:

This law is part of much legal inconsistency and hypocrisy. I'll definitely agree with that. And I can understand your anger at any physician who would do as you described -- I would share such anger. However, I would hope that you would recongnize the child's involvement in the process and the fact that such anger stems from an ethical judgment, rather than a purely logical judgment in the context of "fundamental rights".

You're right the anger is more out of ethical (and some legal) frustration. But again, i don't feel that a child has a fundamental right to an invasive procedure without parental notification. So for me, it's not much of a fundamental rights issue, but i see how it could become one.

hallowedscorn

farfromglorified wrote:

Only sometimes??? Even at my worst, I have my charms

do not be bamboozled. i've lived with him for a year and known him for a lot more. and never has there been a man so devoid of charm. he is a devine dancer, however.

decides2dream

farfromglorified wrote:

I certainly agree with all of this.



Do you honestly believe that every minor in an abortion clinic who is not accompanied by a parent is doing so because the pregnancy is the result of incest or they would be beaten if the parent found out?

no.
whatever about my post even suggested the idea of such?

farfromglorified

decides2dream wrote:

no.
whatever about my post even suggested the idea of such?

What, in your opinion, qualifies as a "good reason" for a minor not inform their parents of their abortion?

farfromglorified

hallowedscorn wrote:

do not be bamboozled. i've lived with him for a year and known him for a lot more. and never has there been a man so devoid of charm. he is a devine dancer, however.

I'm honored that you decided to end your trollscapade just to insult me

Keep it up and I'll start collecting rent.

farfromglorified

chopitdown wrote:

I should clarify that I disagree on the fundamental right of a minor to get an abortion w/o notification of the mother. But the above is true as well.

Ok.

It does pose a strange twist, but I think the intent of the law is to curtail abortions performed on teens unbeknownst to the parents. So they eliminated another avenue for this to occurr, or at least attempted to eliminate.

That is the point of the law IMO as well.

I would respect the will of individual once the individual has reached the age of majority. The reason we have parental notification / consent laws is to protect children from others and themselves. So what happens if the minor is injured while getting the abortion unbeknownst to the parents? Then someone is hurt. If the kids are still minors could the parents sue the physician for battery?

This would only make good sense if there actually was a true "age of majority". That's my fundamental beef with laws like this. I know lots of 25 year olds who aren't qualified to make wise decisions whereas plenty of 16 year olds are.

Regardless, you can't erase the will of a 17 year old by only legally recognizing the will of an 18 year old. It isn't your business to protect anyone from themselves, and it's only truly your business to protect another from yourself.

If a minor is injured while getting the abortion, I fail to see how parental knowledge is relevant. If it is an accident, no redress should be available. If it is from willful harm on the part of the doctor, redress becomes appropriate.

I'll only agree with you somewhat here. If a parent is forcing a child to get a medical procedure and the child doesn't want it, I would back the child 100%; however, if the child is wanting an elective procedure and the parents don't want them to, i would support the parents until said child is of the legal age of majority.

Again, no such "legal age" can erase the actual maturity of the child. Furthermore, no such "legal age" can erase the actual maturity of the parents. I'd back the child in both cases above if the child can demonstrate a good understanding of both.

You're right the anger is more out of ethical (and some legal) frustration. But again, i don't feel that a child has a fundamental right to an invasive procedure without parental notification. So for me, it's not much of a fundamental rights issue, but i see how it could become one.

A child does have such a fundamental right. The very existence of these laws demonstrates that fact since they are aimed at artificially limiting the excercise of that right.

angelica

hallowedscorn wrote:

do not be bamboozled. i've lived with him for a year and known him for a lot more. and never has there been a man so devoid of charm. he is a devine dancer, however.

YIKES! Well, this is a voice I am thrilled to hear out here!

Welcome aboard!

(the dancer thing is a bit hard to swallow, though. )

hallowedscorn

farfromglorified wrote:

I'm honored that you decided to end your trollscapade just to insult me

Keep it up and I'll start collecting rent.

Tsk, tsk. You can't bleed a turnip sweetheart. You're banished to the tipee.

farfromglorified

hallowedscorn wrote:

Tsk, tsk. You can't bleed a turnip sweetheart. You're banished to the tipee.

Yes mother....

hallowedscorn

angelica wrote:

YIKES! Well, this is a voice I am thrilled to hear out here!

Welcome aboard!

(the dancer thing is a bit hard to swallow, though. )

Why thank you! Jeff has spoken highly of you. And a friend of is a friend of...or so it goes.

Pearl Jam and toast

Once you've personally delt with the type of parent who beats their kid for looking at her the wrong way you tend to disagree with the parental consent for this matter..

I honestly know someone who if she got pregnant her mother would kill her. I'm not exageratting either. She's constantly drunk and has been admitted to an asylum twice.

I don't think it's congress's place to pass that bill.

cornnifer

I'm way late into this thread and havn't the time to read 7 pages. Forgive me if it has been said already, but, isn't taking a minor across statelines without the parent's permission, for any reason, kidnapping? Maybe I'm out of the loop, but wasn't kidnapping already against the law?

angelica

hallowedscorn wrote:

Why thank you! Jeff has spoken highly of you. And a friend of is a friend of...or so it goes.

You are very welcome. And thank-you to you. I look forward to hearing your thoughts and views along the way.

surferdude

Pearl Jam and toast wrote:

Once you've personally delt with the type of parent who beats their kid for looking at her the wrong way you tend to disagree with the parental consent for this matter..

I honestly know someone who if she got pregnant her mother would kill her. I'm not exageratting either. She's constantly drunk and has been admitted to an asylum twice.

I don't think it's congress's place to pass that bill.

This kid needs new legal guardian(s), not someone just to take across state lines to get an abortion. We'd all be better, especially this girl, if we attacked the actual problem.

Pearl Jam and toast

surferdude wrote:

This kid needs new legal guardian(s), not someone just to take across state lines to get an abortion. We'd all be better, especially this girl, if we attacked the actual problem.

i know, i've told her that hundreds of times, but there's no one else there.

There are a lot of problems (her druggy dad died years ago, for example) and if her mom is gone she ends up with a foster family.

Right now it's a waiting game until she's 18.

surferdude

Pearl Jam and toast wrote:

i know, i've told her that hundreds of times, but there's no one else there.

There are a lot of problems (her druggy dad died years ago, for example) and if her mom is gone she ends up with a foster family.

Right now it's a waiting game until she's 18.

Doesn't she have any friends with good family's that will take her in? I know I lived with three families growing up and had offers from two others.

As hard as it is to leave your parents you have to do what's best for yourself.

Pearl Jam and toast

surferdude wrote:

Doesn't she have any friends with good family's that will take her in? I know I lived with three families growing up and had offers from two others.

As hard as it is to leave your parents you have to do what's best for yourself.

I agree. If i were in her shoes i'd find a way, but you have to understand the psychology of it too. Her mother is the fucking anti-christ. That kid is scarred for life in so many ways... I don't want to get into all of it right now, but let's just say she feels leaving is impossible.

surferdude

Pearl Jam and toast wrote:

I don't want to get into all of it right now, but let's just say she feels leaving is impossible.

All the more reason why she has to. I feel for every kid in a situation like this. I'm so lucky that I had some great people step up to the plate, take the chance and really help me. Every kid deserves that much, and I'm sure there are people willing to help this girl.

Pearl Jam and toast

surferdude wrote:

All the more reason why she has to. I feel for every kid in a situation like this. I'm so lucky that I had some great people step up to the plate, take the chance and really help me. Every kid deserves that much, and I'm sure there are people willing to help this girl.

I know, i'm on your side here, but she's just got it in her head to put up with it until she can leave..

she has a WONDERFUL family up in Virginia (we're both in N.C.), but i think she wants to stay here for school and other things for now.

decides2dream

farfromglorified wrote:

What, in your opinion, qualifies as a "good reason" for a minor not inform their parents of their abortion?

well the two victory gin mentioned would definitely be biggies. also too, i would think if one has extremely religious parents, thus 100% against abortion and would forbid such, pretty fine reasoning too. all well and good to be religious, but i don't think a pregnant teen should be 'forced' to follow said religious beliefs, and thus denied the right to access of abortion simply b/c their parents disagree. obviously, if they were that religious, they wouldn't be having premarital sex in the first place.

ideally, i would hope if a teen were sadly to get pregnant that they would have a good enough relationship to go and tell their parenst, and get the support they need to make the best decision for themselves, whatever that decision that ultimately would be.

however we do not live in an ideal world, with ideal relationships...etc. obviously, or the very idea of an unwanted pregnancy wouldn't exist period. it's obviously one of those 'grey areas'...and in this specific instance, i believe the pregnant minor's wishes should be followed. yes, obviously they need assistance/guidance, but i do not believe the government should be getting involved, regulating the right or not for one to choose to get assistance, or not, on their own...with or without parental consent.

i look at my own life/history/parents...and i had this very convo with my mother once. thankfully, never in my life have i ever been faced with such a decision, never even had to once consider what i would do if i were ever single and pregnant, but i do believe most girls/women who are sexually active at least think about it. i know i did. that said, as an adult, and long-married...my mother and i had this very convo...if i were young/single/pregnant...would i go to her? i said no.

my mother was, and still is, a VERY religious woman, we never discussed sex, etc....all i ever heard from her at ALL, was abstinence only, i cannot even imagine her be understanding, etc. she has mellowed a LOT as she's aged...but back then? yikes. i most definitely would've enlisted the assistance of my much older sister. my mom was disappointed to hear this of course, but even she admitted she probably would not have been very supportive of such a decision, etc.

there is nothing wrong of course with a parent trying to influence a child, to try and instill their personal values/beliefs on their offspring. but in this instance, something that is going to effect you for the rest of your life, i do believe it should be the pregnant minor's CHOICE if they want such or not, and a parent shouldn't be able to block one's right/access to an aborttion. just my own personal opinion on it. and bottomline, i don't believe the government has any business in getting involved in that.