Proposition
73 violates minors’ privacy rights
Amanda Ansell
Many
parents would like their children to
come to them about important decisions,
which is why Proposition 73 appears reasonable.
This proposition would mandate doctors
who perform abortions to notify the parents
of minor patients and allow for a 48-hour
waiting period before performing the
surgery for the patient to opt-out.
Family communication cannot be legislated. Parents invest their lives in the
upbringing of their children and would like to be informed on all major decisions
made by their children, but the government cannot use laws like this proposed
parental notification measure to impose better communication between parents
and children.
Forty-four states currently have parental consent and notification laws regarding
abortion and they are enforced in 34 states. Due to activist petitions, the
proposition has changed from requiring parental consent to requiring notification
and a 48-hour waiting period. This requirement clearly violates the minor’s
right to privacy.
One may speculate a parent should have the right to be notified when their
child is undergoing surgery, or “a major medical procedure that can have
fatal consequences,” according to a position piece in the Daily Forty-Niner
last week. An abortion is hardly a major medical procedure, but more a major
moral procedure.
According to BirdsAndBees.org, a Web site dedicated to sexual health information, “Abortion
is a safe and legal medical procedure. 97 percent of women report no complications,
2.5 percent of women have minor complications that can be handled at the doctor’s
office, and less than 0.5 percent require some additional surgical procedure.
In fact, a woman has a greater chance of life-threatening complications if
she has her tonsils taken out.”
Studies
show abortion is safe and legal when
performed by qualified doctors. In the
Journal of the American Medical Association
in August 2002, a study showed 47 percent
of minors seeking sexual health care
services in Wisconsin said they would
discontinue use of all reproductive health
services if parents were notified their
children were seeking prescription contraceptives.
Only 1 percent said they would stop having
intercourse. In the case of abortion,
a minor would most likely seek back-alley,
self-induced and illegal abortions in
efforts to hide the truth from their
parents.
Parents are concerned with knowing everything happening in their daughters’ lives,
most would agree her safety comes first, even if she doesn’t come to
them with an unexpected pregnancy. The most important thing is she has access
to counseling and safe, professional medical care.
Many doctors agree the real way to prevent teen pregnancy and abortion is with
sex education, another social service for which funding has been frozen. President
George W. Bush proposed in his 2005 State of the Union Address community-based
abstinence-only programs would receive a boost in funding, increasing from
$74 million to $186 million. He also froze the funds given to Title X family
programs.
The clinics that receive Title X funds provide breast and cervical cancer screenings,
as well as providing confidential contraception options to patients and, more
specifically, minors.
Abstinence-only programs encourage pledges of virginity until marriage, but
according to a 2005 New York Times article, a study of 12,000 young people
who had taken the virginity pledge showed 88 percent had sex before marriage
despite the pledge. The pledge-takers were also less likely to use contraception
when they had sex than those who had not taken the pledge.
Reputable sexual education organizations in the United States, as well as leading
health organizations including the American Medical Association, American Civil
Liberties Union, Planned Parenthood Federation of America and Physicians for
Reproductive Choice & Health have denounced abstinence-only programs. Because
of abstinence-only education minors often leave their lives to chance, resulting
in unwanted teen pregnancies.
Teens are 24 times more likely to die from childbirth than from a legal abortion
performed in the first trimester, according to a ReligiousTolerance.org study
in 2004. Moreover, the teen pregnancy rate in the United States is twice that
in Canada, England, France and Sweden, and 10 times that in the Netherlands,
according to a study by Planned Parenthood Federation of America, an opponent
of Proposition 73.
The ballot is entirely funded by wealthy businessmen, people who have no stake
in pregnancy and are unqualified to speculate on the necessity and benefit
of parental notification laws. Contributors to the proposition are James Homan,
editor of the San Diego Reader, with $400,000; Don Sebastiani, Sebastiani & Sons,
with $100,000 and Tom Monaghan, former owner of Domino Pizza, with $150,000.
If you are at all concerned with the well being of female minors in this state,
I encourage a no vote on Proposition 73 Nov. 8. Defend the privacy and safety
of minors and protect women’s reproductive rights.
Amanda Ansell is a senior public relations major.
|
