Emancipated!
Pages
- 1
- 2
| Author | Topic: Emancipated! |
|---|---|
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Monday, October 23 2006 20:55
Profile
This one might actually spark some debate. I'm abandoning the pro/con list, it was too much work and I've gotten lazy. Ballot Measure 43 This ballot measure requires that when an unemancipated minor 15 years and older seeks an abortion, the medical provider must first give written notice to a parent of the minor, by certified mail, at least 48 hours prior to providing the abortion. Currently no consent or notification is required for 15 and older, but is required for younger children. There are health emergency exceptions, incest exceptions, personal notification is okay, and a hearing before a judge, with witnesses, is a permissable substitute. This is not a question of the legality or advisability of abortion. It appears to only be an issue that the child is unemancipated, and thusly should be receiving medical care with parental permission and knowledge. 33 people cared to offer supporting opinions. 23 people cared to offer dissenting opinions. :) Poll Information This poll contains 1 question(s). 20 user(s) have voted. You may not view the results of this poll without voting. function launch_voter () { launch_window("http://www.ironycentral.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=poll;d=vote;pollid=bNKWmSSuquKf"); return true; } // end launch_voter function launch_viewer () { launch_window("http://www.ironycentral.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=poll;d=view;pollid=bNKWmSSuquKf"); return true; } // end launch_viewer function launch_window (url) { preview = window.open( url, "preview", "width=550,height=300,toolbar=no,location=no,directories=no,status,menubar=no,scrollbars,resizable,copyhistory=no" ); window.preview.focus(); return preview; } // end launch_window   -------------------- quote: Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Dollop of Whipped Cream
Member # 391
|
written Monday, October 23 2006 21:03
Profile
Homepage
I voted yes, but not for the reason you stated in the poll. :P There are sometimes when people have to face the music. Pregnancy is one of them. There is no reason a 16-year-old girl cannot tell her parents she screwed up (literally in this case). The only justification for this would be that if she's too afraid to tell her parents she won't get an abortion. I think they'd notice in a couple of months though. :P -------------------- "Tyranicus is about the only one that still posts in the Nethergate Forum." —Randomizer Spiderweb Chat Room Shadow Vale - My site, home of the Spiderweb Chat Database, BoA Scenario Database, & the A1 Quest List, among other things. Posts: 562 | Registered: Friday, December 14 2001 08:00 |
|
Triad Mage
Member # 7
|
written Monday, October 23 2006 22:10
Profile
Homepage
Yes. I don't see any valid reason for voting against this. -------------------- "At times discretion should be thrown aside, and with the foolish we should play the fool." - Menander ==== Drakefyre's Demesne - Happy Happy Joy Joy Encyclopedia Ermariana - Trapped in the Closet ==== You can take my Mac when you pry my cold, dead fingers off the mouse! Posts: 9436 | Registered: Wednesday, September 19 2001 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 2984
|
written Monday, October 23 2006 22:36
Profile
Homepage
I voted No, but I also think that forcing the reason for Yes onto people was disingenuous. There are plenty of good reasons for requiring doctors to notify parents (not least in case of abuse, which the child herself does not talk about to the parents) that are unrelated to the fundie movement. In fact, my No vote extends only to the requirement, not all the way to prohibition. It can safely be left up to the judgement of the doctor whether notifying the parents is in the patient's interest or not. Well, unless the doctor concerned has Views of his own. But in that case, being a doctor providing abortions is not really the ideal line of work for him. [ Monday, October 23, 2006 22:44: Message edited by: Robert Daniel Oliver ] -------------------- Encyclopaedia Ermariana • Forum Archives • Forum Statistics • RSS [Topic / Forum] My Blog • Polaris • I eat novels for breakfast. Polaris is dead, long live Polaris. Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair. Posts: 8752 | Registered: Wednesday, May 14 2003 07:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 7472
|
written Monday, October 23 2006 23:22
Profile
Homepage
quote:Then do you care to explain why the yes vote reads like this: quote:I intended to hit yes, but the text for yes threw me so badly that I hit abstain instead. I believe that abortion is a perfectly moral way of dealing with an unwanted pregnancy. Especially if said baby would just end up abandoned anyway. At any rate, I believe that parents should be notified in such an instance. Simply because of the consequences that can occur from such actions. [ Monday, October 23, 2006 23:29: Message edited by: Nioca ] -------------------- I tried to think of something witty to put here. Needless to say, I failed. Posts: 2686 | Registered: Friday, September 8 2006 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 2984
|
written Tuesday, October 24 2006 00:33
Profile
Homepage
I can only guess that he meant to be funny. Still, loaded answers are just about the best way to ruin a perfectly good poll. quote: [ Tuesday, October 24, 2006 00:35: Message edited by: Robert Daniel Oliver ] -------------------- Encyclopaedia Ermariana • Forum Archives • Forum Statistics • RSS [Topic / Forum] My Blog • Polaris • I eat novels for breakfast. Polaris is dead, long live Polaris. Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair. Posts: 8752 | Registered: Wednesday, May 14 2003 07:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 6581
|
written Tuesday, October 24 2006 03:09
Profile
Homepage
This time I won't abstain. Yes, exactly like Drakey. -------------------- Download Geneforge 4: Rebellion You have 6 posts. Nobody cares what you think. - Thuryl Wikipedia may be your friend, but UBB is not. - Dikiyoba Posts: 1310 | Registered: Tuesday, December 20 2005 08:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Tuesday, October 24 2006 05:09
Profile
Is parental notification/permission required for any other medical procedure? Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Tuesday, October 24 2006 05:22
Profile
Homepage
My vote is No, a vehement No, and unlike Aran I would extend it all the way to prohibition. I would be all in favor of requiring a 15-year-old who wanted an abortion to jump through hoops as far as talking to doctors and advisors of different opinions. But I stand resolutely behind the following two principles: 1) Adolescents need to have a modicum of control over their bodies; in the case of transfigurative experiences like pregnancy, which can easily be traumatic for mother *AND* child if unwanted by the mother, the adolescent NEEDS to have the final say. Pregnancy does many things to you physically and emotionally, and not all of them are good; it can be frightening and scarring. I'm not advocating abortions, but forcing things on an adolescent only makes things worse. Let's not kid ourselves that "written notice 48 hours prior" means anything other than "requires parental permission" in practical terms. 2) Parents are not infallible, and 15-year-olds are not sponges. I'm all for limits to adolescent freedom and parental rights, but that does not extend to control of one's own body any more than it extends to control of one's own thoughts. Frankly, I would be much more receptive to a law forbidding minors from getting abortions entirely. I wouldn't support that either -- but I can at least be sympathetic to abortion opponents, who often make reasonable arguments. I have no sympathy for those who would target vulnerable adolescents and strip them of their freedom in particular. -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 3364
|
written Tuesday, October 24 2006 06:18
Profile
Homepage
I voted yes. Not for the position to force my child to go through with an unwanted pregnancy, but for the ability to advise, support, comfort, and chide. This kind of procedure is major. The risks include future infertility and even death. The emotional stress from worry and regret can haunt them for the rest of their lives. The risks from going through with the pregnancy are equally as great. In the end I am responsible for my child and all medical bills she rings up. I should at least know what's going on. Yes, I would strongly advise against an abortion, and probably put in a good root for adoption, but I can't see myself putting my foot down. I can, however, see myself letting my husband put his food down and I would probably be glad if he did. So my neutrality is really just a cover for cowardice, but I'm not afraid to admit it. -------------------- "Even the worst Terror from Hell can be transformed to a testimony from Heaven!" - Rev. David Wood 6\23\05 "Do all the good you can, by all the means you can, in all the ways you can, in all the places you can, at all the times you can, to all the people you can, as long as you ever can." - John Wesley Posts: 1001 | Registered: Tuesday, August 19 2003 07:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Tuesday, October 24 2006 07:57
Profile
quote:Yeah, I had some problems coming up with quippy answers for this debate question. I erased the other one I put in there because it was even more offensive. The current campaign slogan for the backers of this bill is Protect Young Girls. While I'm in favor of that idea, I would think more front-end work could be done so that the girls in question didn't have to get major (or minor) surgery after sex. It just seems like too much damn work when a condom (sex ed in schools) would be more efficient. It also served as a platform for ironic social commentary. If parents that oppose abortion (on whatever grounds) have a child that wishes to abort her baby, despite all the 15 years of indoctrination and family discussion into the opposition of abortion, should it not be rightfully assumed that the 15 year old has made up her own mind despite the years of exposure to other viewpoints? Another soundbite I recently heard is that this statutory change will affect fewer than 100 people a year. That is all abortions in the 15-18 unemancipated age range, not the ones that would suddenly get parental notification. -------------------- quote: Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Too Sexy for my Title
Member # 5654
|
written Tuesday, October 24 2006 08:07
Profile
I thought about this for a while, which I shouldn't be doing cuz it's my only day off. So I should just stay in bed and think about ice-cream and stuff. My vote is NO. I have to agree with Slarty on this. I do believe that most 15 year olds are pretty immature. I've actually seen girls have an abortion, without consulting their parents, not learn from their mistake, then get pregnant again, and have yet another abortion. So yes the parents’ should know about this; however, as Slarty said, "Written notice 48 hours prior" means nothing else than "requires parental permission". And even with the situation presented above, which to me is one of the worst situation possible, teens should have the last say. It’s your life, it’s your body; thus, your decision. You are the one going through all of this, you are the one that is going to have to live with the decision, so you should have the say. Teens may not always think with their head, but having sex and then getting pregnant kind of brings some maturity to a girl’s head. And not every 15 year old girl is the same. I agree, as well, that they should not go through the process alone. But let’s be realistic here, not every parent (if any) is supportive of their kids in these type of situations, and some just might make the matter worse. Posts: 1035 | Registered: Friday, April 1 2005 08:00 |
|
Nuke and Pave
Member # 24
|
written Tuesday, October 24 2006 08:13
Profile
Homepage
If relations in a family are so messed up that it takes a court order to make daughter talk to her parents, I doubt anything good will come out of that conversation. And as in every place where abortion was made illegal, the main result of this proposition would be an increase in illegal abortions, with all related health problems. PS By the way, Salmon, this is the California proposition I wanted to post. It's kind of strange to see two contriversial propositions appearing simultaneously in different states. I wonder if there is some sort of national campaign going on. Are there same propositions (a restriction on eminent doman with some surprises hidden in the text, and a parental notification for abortions) in other states as well? EDIT: I just remembered that I was going to post a different issue. Oregon doesn't happen to have a proposition about increasing punishments for sexual offenses, does it? [ Tuesday, October 24, 2006 09:49: Message edited by: Zeviz ] -------------------- Be careful with a word, as you would with a sword, For it too has the power to kill. However well placed word, unlike a well placed sword, Can also have the power to heal. Posts: 2649 | Registered: Wednesday, October 3 2001 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 2984
|
written Tuesday, October 24 2006 08:20
Profile
Homepage
The problem with a unilateral prohibition is that there are cases where the parents need to be notified. Not to decide on the abortion, but to be made aware of a situation their child is in. The one I mentioned (chronic abuse) is such a one. If someone the girl is close to (say, an uncle, a teacher or even a priest) is sexually abusing her (and there have been cases of all of these), it is a fact that the girl is unlikely to come forward and report this herself. By 15, most children can think independently enough, but that is a generalization. -- I am just young enough to see this from the child's side, and old enough to see it like the parents. Yes, there are irresponsible parents. There are a lot who think they know better than their kids what they should or should not do with their bodies (going through pregnancy/getting an abortion in this case). There are goddamn fundies (sorry for the pun) who may lock up or kill their daughter for not staying abstinent. And the opposite (not in a good way) exists: These parents tried to force their (adult) daughter to have an abortion. Parents do crazy things, and the world abounds with children who need to be protected from them. But there are responsible parents, and irresponsible children, as well. And in such cases, who will take care of the child if not the parents? If a minor is pregnant, this at worst indicates that she was raped and isn't telling anyone, and at best that she is ignorant about proper contraception. The alternative is to put the duty of dealing with this on the doctor - such as finding out if she was abused and informing law enforcement, or otherwise educating her about contraception. If the doctor can be trusted with that responsibility, I don't see how he couldn't be trusted to decide whether to inform the parents or not. Sorry if this is turning into a rant; I just feel like your argument assumes three generalizations, namely that children are perfectly self-responsible, parents are untrustworthy and abusive, and doctors are daft. Edit: Admittedly, all the problems I argued here would be solved by a simple post-fact notification of the parents, after the abortion was done. Which conveniently enables the child to have an abortion without parental consent, and also allows the doctor to talk to the parents. So Marlenny (who "sniped" my post, as they say) offered the best choice, I guess. Unless the parents are rabid Phelpsians who are liable to stone their daughter to death (and then protest at her funeral, which is what they do best after all) if they find out about the abortion. Have to take all cases into account, yes. [ Tuesday, October 24, 2006 08:29: Message edited by: Robert Daniel Oliver ] -------------------- Encyclopaedia Ermariana • Forum Archives • Forum Statistics • RSS [Topic / Forum] My Blog • Polaris • I eat novels for breakfast. Polaris is dead, long live Polaris. Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair. Posts: 8752 | Registered: Wednesday, May 14 2003 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 4153
|
written Tuesday, October 24 2006 09:10
Profile
Homepage
I still side with Slarty and Marl. No. That wording is a killer... written notification. It sounds completely harmless, as is, and it almost had me voting yes. If it were just notification and the minor could go ahead with the abortion uninterrupted, then I'd have been on the fence. But as it stands, no. Tyran, "facing the music"?!?! How is it "facing the music" to have to bring an unwanted child into the world? That's more like facing the wood-chipper. The last thing any country needs is unwanted children, and the easiest and least morally objectionable way to do this is through planned, safe abortions. (I can't bring myself to support infanticide...) EDIT: How long 'til JV locks this? [ Tuesday, October 24, 2006 09:11: Message edited by: Ephesos ] -------------------- Gamble with Gaea, and she eats your dice. I hate undead. I really, really, really, really hate undead. With a passion. Posts: 4130 | Registered: Friday, March 26 2004 08:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Tuesday, October 24 2006 09:17
Profile
quote:I think this is the big reason to discuss what are seemingly parochial matters on the boards. There may be a nationwide movement to pass legislation which fails at the national level. It appears that this issue, at least, is one that crosses state borders. -------------------- quote: Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Tuesday, October 24 2006 09:22
Profile
quote:Two things. Firstly, as you've already thought, adoption is the number one best way to deal with unwanted children. Unwanted pregnancies are a different issue, and are not the issue in this instance. We have to assume that an abortion is going to happen if the notification is going to happen. Second thing? JV - this is not a discussion on abortion. It is on parental rights and child rights and forcing a doctor to be moderator between parent and child. That is all. Pretend that we are talking about chest area enhancement surgery instead if there are fewer moral qualms. :) -------------------- quote: Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 32
|
written Tuesday, October 24 2006 11:51
Profile
If she wants it to be her choice. She should get emancipated. -------------------- Lt. Sullust Cogito Ergo Sum Polaris Posts: 2462 | Registered: Wednesday, October 3 2001 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 335
|
written Tuesday, October 24 2006 12:11
Profile
Homepage
Forcing emancipation is no more helpful. I'd vote no, but not without qualms. In an ideal world children should always talk to their parents about abortion and parents should always be receptive and supportive. In a truly ideal world abortion would never be necessary, of course, because there would be no accidental pregnancies. In this very flawed world we live in, though, there are too many possibiiities. If the parents are going to make abortion non-feasible if they know it's going to happen, then I think it's everyone's right, even a minor's, to have an abortion without letting the parents know. If parents could rant and rave and forgive at worst I'd vote yes, but I do think there are children who think their parents would throw them out of the house or permanently harm them for getting an abortion, and some are probably right. —Alorael, who wonders how opinions might change if notification were up to 48 hours after the abortion. His own vote wouldn't change, because he thinks prevention isn't as scary as possible punishment. Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Tuesday, October 24 2006 12:17
Profile
quote:To reiterate, under this proposal the child can go to a judge, explain why the parental units should not be involved, and gain exception to the notification rule. Also, failure to comply with this procedure can open the physician to civil liability to the parent, administrative sanction, license suspension or revocation. Doctors love being the enforcers, right? -------------------- quote: Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 4153
|
written Tuesday, October 24 2006 12:36
Profile
Homepage
quote:(First off, why's the 'd' bold?) I apologize, actually... my post was more of an outburst than I'd intended, mostly set off by "face the music" paired with a :P . And I honestly think that abortions are the best way to prevent unwanted children. And that's the best wording I can think of, since it would keep a great deal of unwanted children from being born in the first place, saving everybody a great deal of time, pain and money. Adoptions are just the most socially acceptable way of dealing with unwanted children in the US at this point in time, effectiveness aside. But that's all a side tangent. Like I said before, if the abortion is to go ahead regardless, then I suppose I could vote in favor of this measure. As long as the parents are not allowed to interfere with it in any way, I think it's an acceptable idea. After all, minors should have legal custody of their own bodies, and parents have a certain right to know what's going on with the flesh of their flesh. -------------------- Gamble with Gaea, and she eats your dice. I hate undead. I really, really, really, really hate undead. With a passion. Posts: 4130 | Registered: Friday, March 26 2004 08:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Tuesday, October 24 2006 13:11
Profile
quote:Apologies all around then. I was being petulant and pointing out that you can't abort an unwanted child. All you can do at that point is find a loving home. Preventing pregnancy, rather than cleaning up afterwards, would be the ideal solution as put forth by Alorael. And I remind everyone that this would affect fewer than 100 pregnancies every year. Not because those aren't important, but because it is fascinating that an issue that affects so few is argued so skillfully by so many. The issue about taxes is boring, yet drains state coffers and enriches the federal government. Real money that will affect every taxpayer. Yet this measure is the one that gets air time, press, signage, outrage, etc. I just don't get it, except that spin is in. I bet you could package up a ballot measure on just about anything (like mandatory seatbelts on farm tractors, but only for operators under the age of 15 that operate machinery for over 4 hours a day on farms of over 50 acres) that could be dressed up to create maximum public outcry and sympathy over what is really not so much of a big deal. :) -------------------- quote: Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Tuesday, October 24 2006 18:53
Profile
Homepage
quote:Bullcrap. Yes, the legislation outlines this procedure; but procedures like this are NEVER implemented in a way that makes them readily accessible to people in crisis -- let alone troubled 15-year-old girls! Such girls would be unlikely to even hear about this option unless they happen to see a sympathetic and unusually legally knowledgeable doctor, and even then [I]how likely is a scared, pregnant 15-year-old who doesn't trust her parents to arrange for a hearing with a judge,[I] which sounds very ominous to children and also has the reality of taking some effort to arrange. -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 4153
|
written Tuesday, October 24 2006 20:19
Profile
Homepage
quote:People accept/ignore/fall asleep to tax measures because they understand that the government takes your money, and it always has. It's normal and boring. But the issue with abortion is that it's talking about people (depending on how you define people, I guess), and it has a deeply emotional impact on everyone involved. It's human, where taxes are decidedly inhuman. Meh. Just my insight. -------------------- Gamble with Gaea, and she eats your dice. I hate undead. I really, really, really, really hate undead. With a passion. Posts: 4130 | Registered: Friday, March 26 2004 08:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Tuesday, October 24 2006 20:26
Profile
quote:Sorry to have offended the nine-headed cave cow god. At least I hope that explains the bull crap. Your logic would hopefully be able to be extended to other parts of life, where equally scared, fragile, and untrained folks might be in over their heads and not hear the proper options. One instance that I can think of is that of a first time criminal, freshly arrested. The arresting officer is lawfully bound to read a list of things to that criminal to protect that criminal. Would it be a hardship for a doctor, when counciling a patient, to also read a list of options? Maybe spend some time to hear the poor kids story and exercise some discretion? Perhaps hear that the home life sucks and offer up the judge hearing option before the parental notification option? Or do we just assume that every kid that is gonna have sex will know about this law and will rush over to their friendly neighborhood judge as soon as they score the abortion cash so that they can have the letter of judicial permission in hand when they get to the doctors office? :) -------------------- quote: Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
Pages
- 1
- 2