Parental Notification/Consent

[Agnapostate]

I'm interested in gauging opinions on the issue of mandating parental notification and/or consent for minors' abortions, and the reasoning behind such a move.

 

[Agnapostate]

Ugh...I meant to write "I oppose mandated parental notification or consent" as a poll option since many undoubtedly support voluntary parental notification without necessarily supporting a state mandate.

Nonetheless...you get the idea.

 

[MrFungus420]

I don't see what the argument is.

For a minor to get medical treatment requires the consent of the parent or guardian.

If the procedure were a tonsilectomy, there would be no argument about the requirement for parental/guardian consent.

 

[Jerry]

I don't see what the argument is.

For a minor to get medical treatment requires the consent of the parent or guardian.

If the procedure were a tonsilectomy, there would be no argument about the requirement for parental/guardian consent.

That's my position exactly.

 

[Dezaad]

I don't see what the argument is.

For a minor to get medical treatment requires the consent of the parent or guardian.

If the procedure were a tonsilectomy, there would be no argument about the requirement for parental/guardian consent.

I said much the same thing to my brother the other night, in a conversation on this matter. He didn't give me much to think about, but I later started thinking this through for myself.

It's not a tonsilectomy, and it's certainly not just a medical procedure. I am not sure that I agree that a parent, alone, should be allowed to decide for a teenager a thing of such lasting consequence.

We don't even view teenagers as simply children in our society. They may be tried as adults, for example, at the discretion of a Judge. The reason for this is that we feel that teenagers are capable of some adult decision making.

I think for me it would depend on the age of the teenager. I also think there should probably be the possibility of a Judge becoming involved at any age where we want parent's notification or consent.

Finally, I am not sure that parents ought to have to consent for medical treatment for all ages of teenagers. I certainly think that they are capable in many cases of making these decisions. Its just not usually an issue. The only reason its an issue here is because the parent's ideology might conflict with the teenager's.

 

[Jerry]

I said much the same thing to my brother the other night, in a conversation on this matter. He didn't give me much to think about, but I later started thinking this through for myself.

It's not a tonsilectomy, and it's certainly not just a medical procedure. I am not sure that I agree that a parent, alone, should be allowed to decide for a teenager a thing of such lasting consequence.

We don't even view teenagers as simply children in our society. They may be tried as adults, for example, at the discretion of a Judge. The reason for this is that we feel that teenagers are capable of some adult decision making.

I think for me it would depend on the age of the teenager. I also think there should probably be the possibility of a Judge becoming involved at any age where we want parent's notification or consent.

Finally, I am not sure that parents ought to have to consent for medical treatment for all ages of teenagers. I certainly think that they are capable in many cases of making these decisions. Its just not usually an issue. The only reason its an issue here is because the parent's ideology might conflict with the teenager's.

If the teen is found at fault for hitting someone with a car, who has to pay the bills?

 

[prometeus]

The best interest of the minor is the only factor. A tonsillectomy does not require consent if the parent refuses to have the child treated. Children's Services can petition a court to override a parents wishes if it is in the best interest of the child. It is called neglect, although neglect does not play a role in abortion, well to a certain point.
I believe a competent counselor should evaluate the situation in case a minor wants an abortion and act in the best interest of the minor. While parental notification is the better course, in most cases I believe, making it legally mandatory can create problems in some cases.

That option should be part of the survey too.

 

[prometeus]

If the teen is found at fault for hitting someone with a car, who has to pay the bills?

It depends who's car it is.

 

[Jerry]

The best interest of the minor is the only factor. A tonsillectomy does not require consent if the parent refuses to have the child treated. Children's Services can petition a court to override a parents wishes if it is in the best interest of the child. It is called neglect, although neglect does not play a role in abortion, well to a certain point.
I believe a competent counselor should evaluate the situation in case a minor wants an abortion and act in the best interest of the minor. While parental notification is the better course, in most cases I believe, making it legally mandatory can create problems in some cases.

That option should be part of the survey too.

In extreme cases, I agree, but we need to place the default trust in the parents and the burden of proof of abuse or neglect on any 3rd party consoler.

If abuse or neglect cannot be proven before a judge, then the parent's rights in the 'care, control and custody' of their children should remain uninfringed.

 

[Jerry]

It depends who's car it is.

Not at all, actually, because if it's someone else’s car and she's at fault, the insurance company can sure the driver.

And when that happens, who pays? The teen?

 

[Laila]

Oppose parental consent/notification if the teen is 16 or above

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

As long as they are the wards of their parents-- as long as their parents are held legally and financially responsible for them-- any medical decisions they make should be subject to parental notification and consent.

If people are sitting here and thinking that fifteen and sixteen year old women should be making these decisions without parental interference... then those same fifteen and sixteen year olds should legally be considered adults.

 

[Laila]

here and thinking that fifteen and sixteen year old women should be making these decisions without parental interference... then those same fifteen and sixteen year olds should legally be considered adults.

They can choose to serve the army at 16, drink at 16, marry at 16, have sex at 16, work at 16.
If they have enough responsibility to do all that then they can make a choice on what they wish to do with their body without their parent present.
Ofc, i support the voting and age of 'adult' to be lowered

 

[DGomez]

They can choose to serve the army at 16, drink at 16, marry at 16, have sex at 16, work at 16.
If they have enough responsibility to do all that then they can make a choice on what they wish to do with their body without their parent present.
Ofc, i support the voting and age of 'adult' to be lowered

Teenagers are idiots. And you don't realize how stupid you are until you're older, which is the scary part. 16 is far to young for anyone to have that kind of responsibility. Most girls are still maturing physically and facial hair is still a distant dream for boys at that age.

If the teenager is financially dependent on their parent then that parent has every single right to know what they are paying for.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

They can choose to serve the army at 16, drink at 16, marry at 16, have sex at 16, work at 16.
If they have enough responsibility to do all that then they can make a choice on what they wish to do with their body without their parent present.
Ofc, i support the voting and age of 'adult' to be lowered

Can't do anything of those things at 16 in the United States, at least not without parental consent.

I agree with you, that the age ought to be lowered. I prefer fifteen, but sixteen would be perfectly acceptable.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

Teenagers are idiots. And you don't realize how stupid you are until you're older, which is the scary part. 16 is far to young for anyone to have that kind of responsibility. Most girls are still maturing physically and facial hair is still a distant dream for boys at that age.

I'm thirty and still can't grow facial hair.

Of course, I've also been capable of supporting myself since before I was sixteen-- only reason I stayed at home after that was so I could finish high school and hopefully go on to college.

 

[Laila]

Can't do anything of those things at 16 in the United States, at least not without parental consent.

I agree with you, that the age ought to be lowered. I prefer fifteen, but sixteen would be perfectly acceptable.

Ohh, my bad - i only knew US drinking age was 21 right?
Obv a few of them needs parental consent e.g. marry

 

[Laila]

Teenagers are idiots. And you don't realize how stupid you are until you're older, which is the scary part. 16 is far to young for anyone to have that kind of responsibility. Most girls are still maturing physically and facial hair is still a distant dream for boys at that age.

If the teenager is financially dependent on their parent then that parent has every single right to know what they are paying for.

I matured at a very young age, you was saying?
I disagree.
A teenager is able to make a decision regarding Abortion with or without the parents and consent should never be needed to have access to it.
The Doctors regardless are not allowed to break patient confidentiality so the doctors informing parents is out of the question.

 

[Anima]

Completely opposed to both, in any circumstance.

To give an example UK pro-lifers use a lot. schools usually won't even give a child a pain killer without parental permission(my school wouldn't even do it with permission - breaking my leg there was hella fun), but that's less to do with parental rights/incapability of teens to make decisions and more to do with covering their own asses in the event that something goes wrong and trying to avoid doing anything that could lead to a lawsuit.

In terms of actual medical procedures, children and under-16's can sometimes get the final word on those decisions, if thier doctor believes they're mature enough to understand the consequences.

Either way, you can't compare tonsilectomies and painkillers to abortions. Denying a painkiller doesn't lead to 9 months of increased physical strain and risk of mortality. Denying a tonsilectomy doesn't end with either bringing up child you weren't ready to take care of, or giving it up for adoption and sufferring all the stress and uncertainty that path often leads to.

That's the thing about parental consent, in any area: kids can generally reverse what their parents said or did when they turn 18. If Mom wouldn't let you have a tattoo, you can get one then, you can still see that Certicate 18 film, you can pretty much guide your life as you please.

Refusing consent to an abortion isn't like that. It's a decision made for a child with consequences that span across a whole life. The kid doesn't magically disappear when you hit 18 and wouldhave been able to make your own decision. Being a parent means you need to guide your child, but in my opinion, kids aren't property, and you don't get to tell them what to do with their bodily organs when they, not you, will be forced to spend their lives dealing with the consequences of YOUR decision.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

Ohh, my bad - i only knew US drinking age was 21 right?
Obv a few of them needs parental consent e.g. marry

Have to be 21 to drink, 18 to own a longarm, 21 to own a handgun, 18 to marry without parental permission (in most States, unless you're pregnant), 18 to serve in the military, 18 (in most states) to sign a contract, &c.

Given my preferences, I would set all of these ages to 15-- allowing parental consent and supervision for younger children to operate a motor vehicle or a firearm, or to drink in their parents' home.

 

[DGomez]

I matured at a very young age, you was saying?
I disagree.
A teenager is able to make a decision regarding Abortion with or without the parents and consent should never be needed to have access to it.
The Doctors regardless are not allowed to break patient confidentiality so the doctors informing parents is out of the question.

You must look at the larger majority when creating a law rather than just individual experiences. Granted, there are fully independent teenagers out there. But are the majority of them mature and independent? No. Not by any means. If their parents pay for their bills then they have every right to know what they're paying for.

 

[Anima]

You must look at the larger majority when creating a law rather than just individual experiences. Granted, there are fully independent teenagers out there. But are the majority of them mature and independent? No. Not by any means. If their parents pay for their bills then they have every right to know what they're paying for.

And if the parents aren't "paying the bill" for an abortion, would you agree it's not their business?

 

[1069]

If parents are permitted to force a minor to continue a pregnancy against her will, then it follows that they can also force her to terminate a pregnancy against her will, n'est ce pas?

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

If parents are permitted to force a minor to continue a pregnancy against her will, then it follows that they can also force her to terminate a pregnancy against her will, n'est ce pas?

Ghastly concept, but parents are allowed to force their children to undergo medical procedures that they are opposed to-- and it would take truly ridiculous circumstances for a court to hold that this is abuse.

Not something I would support, especially for women who are old enough that they should be considered adults-- but there isn't much I can do about the fact that there are barbarians all over this country.

 

[RightOfCenter]

If parents are permitted to force a minor to continue a pregnancy against her will, then it follows that they can also force her to terminate a pregnancy against her will, n'est ce pas?

Yes.

On topic:

One would think that any doctor would be absolutely ****ing insane to perform an abortion on a minor. If something went wrong and the child was harmed he would be sued into poor house. Minors are not legally able to sign consent forms for operations such as this.