So over the next few days, I’ll go through my thoughts on the California initiatives.
I’ll start with what is, for me, the most difficult decision – Proposition 73.
The gist of the proposition would require that pregnant minor girls would have to have parental consent to get an abortion, or lacking that, consent from a juvenile court.
A tough one for me.
I have no daughters, only sons. I’ve paid for some abortions in my time, and while I’m not tormented by those memories, neither am I exuberant about them. Personally, I subscribe to the “legal, safe, and rare” formulation where abortion is concerned.
But – to set out something which I think closely parallels abortion (although abortion is to me far more complex, because it represents the intersection with three sets of rights – the woman’s, the to-be-born fetus’, and the father’s) – I also believe strongly in the individual right to own guns. And in the notion that that right may be limited by reasonable regulations.
One of the reasonable regulations on gun ownership says that minors may not buy guns, or in many states, possess them without an adult’s presence.
I don’t think that’s a bad thing. And yes, I know about the idyllic days when kids would bring their 30-30 to school on the opening day of deer season.
Similarly, I’m a strong supporter of some core right to abortion – probably not including late-term abortions. But I’m troubled at the idea that a girl who cannot get her ears pierced (or here in L.A., her bellybutton pierced) without Mon or Dad signing off can go to a clinic and have an abortion with no adult supervision or involvement except by the abortion provider.
So I was spinning around this issue pretty tightly, until TG and I discussed it. She hates initiative law in general (she works with lawyers, and thinks that we ought to leave it to the pros – riiiiight).
But she made the telling point on this to me when she said “I’d support this if the Legislature passed it. But it just doesn’t seem to rise to the level of the kind of issue we ought to be passing in initiative law.”
She’s right.
So I’ll be voting – more than a bit reluctantly – “No” on Proposition 73.
Agreed on the vote – a conflicted no, but ‘no’ nonetheless. Somewhat different reasoning. It’s a sad fact that a large minority of young women finding themselves in such circumstances are there in part due to disfunctional family settings. Settings where the ‘cure’ of the permission may be worse than the ‘disease’ of the abortion. There’s no good answer for all circumstances, and I don’t see where I, through the agency of the state, have any rationale for telling her which tragedy is the worse. (And I’ve heard of enough nonsense coming out of family courts to not want another burden or bone thrown that way.)
Dysfunctional or no, the parents need to consent to have the procedure done. My daughters wouuldn’t be able to even have their teeth cleaned without my consent, and now we’re talking about having a surgical procedure done?
If the family is that dysfunctional that the kids can’t get or refuse to get parental consent, then the courts really need to know about it. And, that’s just another good reason to vote for Prop 73.
Its a tough call, could go either way. I think most folks who aren’t extreme hardcore on either side of the abortion issue are of two minds on this one.
I don’t agree with using it as a protest vote against overuse of the initiative process, though, if I’m understanding AL’s rationale correctly. That just seems like a dodge to me.
Having grown up in New England during that era when the town meeting each first Tuesday in March was actually an exercise in direct democracy, I am less opposed than some to initiative legislation. In California it has become almost a necessity because the legislative boundaries have been drawn to ensure incumbancy. This ties the legislature there to one party rule, regardless of what the people think. Perhaps the initiative on _that_ problem will ultimately put the legislature back in the hands of the public, but until then initiative have become a vital tool in true majority rule.
That said, I would offer two key points about parental consent. First, there has been a concerted effort of many years’ duration to wrest the ‘social’ aspect of child rearing away from parents. This is a nearly universal approach amongst tyrants ( eg Stalin, Hitler) and would-be tyrants.
Second, with pregnant minor females, the age of the father is inversely proportional to that of the pregnant female. The younger the female the older (median age, proportionally) of the male who got her pregnant.
Do you really wish to let older males continue to exploit young girls for their own gratification while avoiding the consequences by hiding it from the parents? I know, sometimes the girl’s father, uncle, grandfather, brother, whatever is the perp.
The expolitation and the incest will continue unabated as long as we enable it to remain hidden in the name of ‘reproductive freedom.’ _Enough !_ I say.
The parent as perp argument is convincing to me.
Point 2: this is really a stealth effort to get “the unborn child is a child” language in the state constitution. Maybe it should be in there, I’m not sure, but if so we ought to have a discussion of that, not about permission slips, before it gets voted on.
I come from a long line of conservatives (during the Depression my great-grandfather consistently referred to FDR as “Old Horse Face”). Most of my female relatives are mildly pro-choice, but they are the ones that had to go to another state when the local committee that used to approve such things said they could not have an abortion after they had measles while pragnent, or they had to choose between their own health while fighting TB (successfully, thanks be to G*d) over that of another child they were carrying. These are moral questions – hardly the thing to seek guidance from politicians.
Armed Liberal: “I’ve paid for some abortions in my time, and while I’m not tormented by those memories, neither am I exuberant about them.”
I did not know this.
Anyway the reason that this rises to the level of a voter initiative is that the core drive for abortion comes from the kind of people who think that if killing a couple of kids will save them from buying mayonnaise in extra-large jars like lesser people do, then kill away. It’s a priority on lifestyle and privilege over humanity. So the more socially elite barriers you put between popular will and the result, the more pro-choice the result will be. With popular initiatives, you can hope to accomplish something. With the barrier of the legislature, less. With the courts deciding, expect extreme abortion rights to appear out of nowhere.
On the other hand, if you want more abortions, and have indeed paid for some, without exuberance or remorse, then more elite control, less popular impetus is the way to get the outcome you want.
In other words, I think in effect you are saying: vote for more abortions, as a protest against popular input. But the real objection to popular input is that it’s not the way to get to more abortions. You only restated your original preference.
Though when a man pays to have this done, that’s no mere “preference”.
As a practical matter we benefit from encouraging women to have kids only after being educated and becoming mature.
_The parent as perp argument is convincing to me._
Imagine you’re the mother of a 13-year old and your husband gets her pregnant. Is it better to:
a) discover she’s pregnant and seeking an abortion; spend some time talking with her and discover her horrible ‘secret;” and _then_ have to confront the core problem … or
b) continue on unaware
*Which is better for the _child_?*
What if it were her _teacher_? (and yes, there are documented cases) This kind of abuse thrives on secrecy and deception and ignorance. Any law breaking that horrible silence in even a few cases is a big improvement, most especially for the girls involved.
75% of Americans believe abortion should be legal but restricted to various degrees. Parental notification is one of the most obviously reasonable restrictions.
Well said Bart Hall!!
For the rest, I don’t understand what the “two minds” stuff is about.
Either you think that a fetus is a baby, or not.
Is that too black-and-white? I think it’s good to be black-and-white about what is and is not human life.
Not tormented, but not exuberant?
If you believe that abortions don’t end a human life, then why are your feelings about the abortions you paid for any different from your feelings about any other surgery you might undergo?
Bart,
Good point. But let’s take your scenario and ask this: what if the mother knows, and the father declines permission? Also possible here.
There’s no parental involvement or non-involvement option that’s free of nightmare scenarios. Which inclines me to avoid handing humans that level of authority over others by law, and to devote any reasonable restriction efforts elsewhere.
Ben,
Let me put it this way. A house cat isn’t a human life. Most people also think killing one is a little bit different from undergoing an operation and removing a tumor.
Just about everyone agrees that a fetus is a living thing. And the “is it human?” question is indeed an aspect of the debate that can’t be avoided or ducked by pro-choicers (the biggest pro-life political bonanza of the past 30 years was… ultrasound). Those who answer “no,” however, are not forced thereby give up all consideration for the fetus.
_what if the mother knows, and the father declines permission?_
Look, in most of these father-as-perp cases the family is going to blow apart. The mother has ample grounds for a restraining order and the father is probably going to do jail time. Too bad. Get the daughter to safety and start dealing with the aftermath. The alternatives are far worse.
Actually I worry much more about the potential of a mother-complicit (passively or _actively_) scenario, which is depressingly common.
For that and other reasons I believe parental notification should be merely a beginning point. I would proffer the idea that every abortion, stillbirth/miscarriage and live birth should be DNA tested when the female is under 16. You could argue 18, and you could argue 14, but those are details. Where incest and/or abuse are possible then potential perps should submit DNA for matching. This is a whole discussion in itself.
_inclines me to avoid handing humans that level of authority over others by law_
Generally I agree with you. We are, however, talking about minor children. Parents ought to have the preponderant right of authority over their children, and when that right is abused society has a right to step in. Defining that threshold would be tricky even without the volatile emotional component.
Parents are the first line of defence in child protection. Parental notification will, in the vast majority of situations, reinforce that role. When parents abdicate or abandon that role, or when they actively work against the interests of their child(ren) the State has a role to play, _in loco parentis._
Those people who suggest that sexual freedom and secrecy are in the interests of any child under 14 are so far out of the mainstream as to invalidate the utility of their opinions on the matter.
Bart / Joe
Why are we quibbling over scenarios that are already covered by some aspect of law? The issues you raise concerning notification of parents have nothing to do with the issues either of you bring up.
Assuming the case scenarios you two point out, seems to me the child could file a grievance with the proper authorities before it gets to the pregnancy stage. Let’s be honest here people, it is not as if the child has no recourse concerning her plight in life.
The types of scenarios you two are discussing do nothing more than side step the underlying problem. For crying out loud a child that needs permission for a naval ring or adult supervision to watch R rated movies gets a free pass on one of life’s most important decisions.
Why have parenting at all? Release all authority to the state or the feds and wash the parents hands all together. Seems to me we as a society have been heading that way now for the past few decades. Would I advocate such a thing as I just suggested. Not on my life or my watch.
I don’t live in CA anymore but if I did, mark me down for YES on the ballot. I will not relinquish my parenting authority to the state or anyone else for that matter.
And I would read news if the mainstream media did it. It’s not like news rises to the level we ought to have done in citizen journalist blogs. /s
Relying on a trite, empty quip from TG as an argument, is very much unlike you AL. I’ve come to rely on yours to be sound and in-depth reasoning. Here’s hoping you can come up with something better than the what you usually rail against when coming from the MSM before election day.
bq. The gist of the proposition would require that pregnant minor girls would have to have parental consent to get an abortion, or lacking that, consent from a juvenile court.
*Notifcation*, not consent.
Big difference.
Actually h0mi, it’s a48 hour delay after notification OR consent. Practically speaking, it’s parental consent.
No, I don’t think this is a ‘protest vote against the initiative process’; it’s pretty much exactly as TG put it. I don’t see this issue rising to the level of importance justifying the use of initiative law. Partly, that’s because I don’t have strong feelings about it – because I’m conflicted.
A.L.
*if i was even old enough to vote … i would vote no on prop. 73* But im not. im 16 years old. im researching for a debate fer my English class and came across this page. Even though *some* of you have made some good points, when reading all of these arguments i have laughed many times. You all have no idea what its like. you say its your rights as parents to know if your daughter were to undergo this procedure, but its our right as human beings to keep that from you (right to privacy). But if you were really that involved or that close to your daughter she would feel the need or the right to tell you, but if not then its just better that you dont know. She is doing it for not just herself, but for you to. Knowing or even thinking your parents are dissapointed in you or dont know what to do with you is one of the worst feelings someone can feel along with many other feelings that someone else will find out, or that you will be taunted or looked at differently or just fear period. do you honestly want your daughter to feel that way, or feel she has to run away, or harm herself to avoid telling you or telling anyone whom she cares about? its better left that teens should be able to get abortions without parental consent.