<p>“I’ve known plenty of one-issue voters who would never consider a candidate unless he supported complete restriction of abortion.”</p>
<p>THose people have already been picked apart on this thread. I know lots of people who would only vote for candidates who favor unrestricted abortion on demand.</p>
<p>cartera45 said:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I believe I saw where drug use during pregnancy has already been applied in the context to which you refer. I think an argument could also be made for cigarette and alcohol use. Or obesity! Wow, perhaps we could criminalize pregnant women gaining too much weight. How about making women who already have a sexually transmitted disease that might infect the baby get sterilized (it might be possible under *Buck v. Bell * “three generations of imbeciles are enough”). Or make it a crime if a pregnant women contacted such a disease during pregnancy. What a great way to legislate a woman’s entire personal and business life while pregnant.</p>
<p>Slippery is an understatment. What if there is a prior miscarriage. An argument would be that full bed rest is required or you could be prosecuted for reckless homicide. I guess society will pay for the time away from work. </p>
<p>Forget most sports activities while pregnant. And perhaps flying in an airplane above certain altitudes. What a perfectly moral way to get these pesky women out of the work force and back at home where they belong.</p>
<p>sjmom2329, zoosermom and Hindoo The one-issue litmus voter who backs only candidates who would allow no restrictions on abortion, if he is successful in getting his candidate elected, leaves the “no abortion under any circumstance” voter with the ability to have it “her way” and not have an abortion. Not so in the converse situation.</p>
<p>Excellent point. Indeed, the pro-choice faction is not insisting that all women should HAVE abortions, while pro-lifers attempt to force all women NOT to have one.</p>
<p>“sjmom2329, zoosermom and Hindoo The one-issue litmus voter who backs only candidates who would allow no restrictions on abortion, if he is successful in getting his candidate elected, leaves the “no abortion under any circumstance” voter with the ability to have it “her way” and not have an abortion. Not so in the converse situation”</p>
<p>It depends on the specific abortion legislation we’re talking about. Legislation that denies parental notification comes right into my home. But, again, I don’t vote on abortion and it’s not even on my top five list.</p>
<p>The right to choose is important to me, but at this point I could vote for a “pro-life” candidate who showed a sincere interest in getting our soldiers out of Iraq ASAP, coming up with a broad health care reform/insurance program, improving our education system, paying off trillions of dollars in debt, and rebuilding our national infrastructure. Of course, that person doesn’t exist.</p>
<p>zoosermom I think I was correct. The “no abortion, no how, no way” female parent voter gets to not have an abortion if she does not choose to. With no parental consent, her daughter is also free to choose to not have an abortion (or to choose to have one). That’s why for the female who is pregnant one position is “pro-choice” and the other is “no choice.”</p>
<p>"zoosermom I think I was correct. The “no abortion, no how, no way” female parent voter gets to not have an abortion if she does not choose to. With no parental consent, her daughter is also free to choose to not have an abortion (or to choose to have one). That’s why for the female who is pregnant one position is “pro-choice” and the other is “no choice.”</p>
<p>I stand by my statement. In a jurisdiction with no parental consent, my right to parent my child would be displaced. I have a 15 year old and she should not be free to have any type of medical procedure without my consent. But this is all why I think abortion should be a state issue.</p>
<p>ZM: parental notification sounds good in theory and is certainly an emotional hot button but the reality of life is there are too many young women for whom parental notification is not an option, for reasons ranging from physical abuse to incest. Expecting young women in a difficult situation, probably compounded by time-wasting denial, to navigate the judicial system to obtain a non-parental waiver in a sufficiently timely basis is a non-starter…just look at how many minors can’t navigate the more straightforward, with lots of information abounding, college application system and by presumed default these are the smarter, better informed young people!</p>
<p>I know the common image of parental notification is of young woman with supportive parent or parents sitting around the kitchen table having a even-keeled discussion about a difficult situation but that is as far from reality for too many young women as an episode of “The Brady Bunch,” as anyone working in the social welfare system will tell you.</p>
<p>x-posted: I don’t think that abortion should be a state issue, where vagaries of geography (and due to variation of local laws) economic status has an effect on what should be a fundamental right of a woman to choose.</p>
<p>zoosermom, if your 15 year old became pregnant, would you force her to give birth against her will?</p>
<p>I understand your thoughts on this, zoosermom, and I’m also conflicted. Unfortunately, forced parental consent sometimes involves more than informing a pair of loving parents. It could also include giving the news to a parent who would toss the girl out of the house, beat her to a purple pulp, humiliate her, force a baby to have a baby, regardless. Etc. It’s a tough call. As responsible, caring mothers with teen daughters, it’s understandable that you and I would want to know about a pregnancy and possible abortion in the offing. But then, we’re not representative of all parents.</p>
<p>zoosermom</p>
<p>It is the parents’ right to decide the abortion issue? Well, what if the girl wants to keep the baby and the parents want her to abort?</p>
<p>I take it you would allow the parents to decide their daughter couldn’t have the abortion but would not allow them to force her to have the procedure. Do you see the problem in that?</p>
<p>TheDad, among my many years of volunteering has involved dealing with teenagers in such situations and I can tell you that the common picture is this: a young woman with imperfect parents who finds herself pregnant by someone who is older than she. The “father” will then “support and encourage” her to have an abortion so as not to be paying child support or be prosecuted. TheDad, we’ve disagreed, agreed and always gotten along well, but I’ve spent thousands of hours dealing with this particular issue for over 20 years and my perception is accurate and has nothing to do with the “common image.” The “father” of that girl’s baby is not interested in her well being, in making sure that she receives follow-up care and is healthy, he wants to protect himself. There are a small number of incest cases, but those can be dealt with throught the judicial override procedure. I’ve been involved personally in those also. The procedure does work. Unfortunately, teen pregnancy is one of those situations in which there is no good outcome, but for the vast majority of young women, their parents are the best resource. The number of young women with parents who victimize them is balanced in my mind by the number of young women who are victimized by their impregnators.</p>
<p>If my 15-year old became pregnant, it would depend on the situation. If she were so far along as to make abortion undesirable, then yes I would. Early on, we’d make the decision together. In either case, I’d make sure that she had follow-up medical care.</p>
<p>“zoosermom
I take it you would allow the parents to decide their daughter couldn’t have the abortion but would not allow them to force her to have the procedure. Do you see the problem in that?”</p>
<p>O7Dad, I’m going to respectfully ask you once to never put words into my keyboard or “take” or “assume” anything. If my position is unclear, ask me, but don’t go on record for me. On a personal level, I think that the decision should be the young woman’s, but I don’t think parents should be cut out because who will manage her post-surgical care? Not the impregnator, that’s for sure. Who will make sure that her medical history is given to the “provider?” Not the impregnator, that’s for sure. Who will make sure that the abortion is actually what she wants? Not the impregnator, that’s for sure.</p>
<p>Here is a non-rhetorical question for those of you who oppose parental notification. Here’s a chance to make your case and help influence another point of view: how would you protect the young woman from whomever impregnated her? How would you be sure that she wanted the abortion, that her medical needs were met, and that she was ok afterward?</p>
<p>You pose a good question regarding how to protect a young woman from her impregnator. At the same time, how do you protect her from enraged, irrational parents? Not all parents fall into that category, nor are all “impregnators” predatory and controlling. I’ve also done volunteer work in this area (not as much as you have, but some), and more often than not, the father is a teen boy who’s just as scared and freaked out as the girl.</p>
<p>Hindoo, I think that’s very often the case and I always want to take those kids home. Those are both the kids who need parental help, even angry parental help. I think the young woman has to be protected, of course, but you know what? Parents get angry and I don’t think she should be protected from the fact that her actions impact others. My 15 year old did a very bad thing recently, not pregnancy related, and one of the biggest natural consequences was seeing her father cry. Absent abuse (which I do not think normal parental emotion is), I actually think young women are better off after abortions if they know that a serious thing happened to them that will require time and healing, as opposed to just being “not pregnant anymore” and then coming to grips later on. I can’t imagine keeping that secret. Actions have consequences and that shouldn’t be removed from the equation. Pregnancy shouldn’t be an excuse to remove a child from her parent’s care and support, which I see as the core for many notification opposers (not all and not most but many), but I think that the vast majority of American parents are imperfect human beings who are their kids’ best support, and the vast majority love their kids more than life.</p>
<p>ZM, to address your concerns, I would have no problem with an assessment and counseling session provided by something like Planned Parenthood, with the young woman <em>alone</em>. I’ve heard of too many situations where, as you suggest, someone may be a coercive influence and that a victim will say one thing in their presence, another in a safe surrounding to neutral parties.</p>
<p>I don’t have your direct experience but my foster-mother was a probation officer and an Episcopalian priest (sequentially, not concurrently) and I picked up enough knowledge of the seamier side of society from her to satisfy myself as to which way I’m going to err. I have zero confidence in the ability of a young woman to navigate a judicial override system. Aside from the logistics of the system, there is the issue of trusting multiple adults, particularly in areas where the local attitudes may be very strong. A system has to work as well in Deer Dropping, Mississippi or Broken Condom, Arizona as well as it does in NYC or San Francisco. I am not a proponent of equal rights for all depending upon where you live.</p>
<p>X-posted again: the “vast majority” of parents being their kids best support is insufficient. In the circumstance, what do you think, 75 percent? 80? 85? Even 10 percent who are not is too large a number to impose the Brady Bunch solution on everyone.</p>
<p>I googled abortion and my zip code. I found Planned Parenthood, a Women’s Clinic and another abortion provider within 7 miles of my zip code. </p>
<p>The average price for the medical and vaccuum procedures in the first trimester are $315-375. With the medical procedure there is no invasive procedure required and even the vaccuum procedure is done on an outpatient basis. There are very detailed discriptions of the process, before, during and after.</p>
<p>I called the locations and the state agency that regulates doctors. You can determine whether the doctor has had any complaints very easily. Also, google brought up websites that have girls who give recommendations/ratings on the reproductive services they have received at the locations.</p>
<p>Hindoo is correct. It is a oversimplification to believe that the boys are all going to rush the girl to have an abortion. I have two friends who have had to deal with teen pregnancy. One friend (a female) got married and they are still married over 25 years later. The other (a male) got married and there was a subsequent divorce and the child lived with and was raised by the father.</p>
<p>If the female wants to “stop” the impregnantor she can (1) go to the police if what he is doing is a crime or (2) have nothing more to do with him.</p>
<p>From my experience as a parent, a relationship between the parent and child that affords the child a heartfelt belief that the parent is a help resourse makes parental notification unnecessary for that lucky child. If the only way the girl would ever let her parents know she was pregnant was if the law forced her to, well, that says volumns about her level of trust in her parents as a help resourse.</p>
<p>zoosermom Our kids would probably come to us with any big problem. But our kids aren’t all kids and lots of kids aren’t lucky enough to have a help resourse rather than something quite different. What about those kids, especially a pregnant girl? Parental notification for her can be as dangerous to her health as the backroom or self help abortions of my youth were to girls back then.</p>
<p>X-posted again: the “vast majority” of parents being their kids best support is insufficient. In the circumstance, what do you think, 75 percent? 80? 85? Even 10 percent who are not is too large a number to impose the Brady Bunch solution on everyone.</p>
<p>Do you think the well-being of the kids with abusive parents outweighs the well-being of the kids being abused by an older male?</p>
<p>“zoosermom Our kids would probably come to us with any big problem. But our kids aren’t all kids and lots of kids aren’t lucky enough to have a help resourse rather than something quite different. What about those kids, especially a pregnant girl? Parental notification for her can be as dangerous to her health as the backroom or self help abortions of my youth were to girls back then.”</p>
<p>And abortion or RU-486 can be just as deadly, particularly to a young girl who doesn’t know how much bleeding is too much or has a pre-existing condition that a provider should know about. How do you decide which risk to take? That is a serious question. If you can say “I support abortion so completely that I am willing to accept the risk to the lives/happiness/reproductive health of a small number of young women who have abortions without proper support because I don’t believe any limits should be placed on choice” then I will respect you, but I’m trying to figure that out. Again, not rhetorical, but which risks are acceptable to you, personally?</p>