Forums > Social Discussion > parents knowing if a teenager has had an abortion
Login/Join to ParticipateWoman! Not gay Man!
332 posts
Location: Hull...ish
332 posts
Location: Hull...ish
Posted:
at the moment there's talk of parents being able to find out if their teenage daughter wants an abortion despite confidetiality.
I was wondering what you lot think about this
Im against it for lts of reasons... like the righs of the teenager to the same treatment as an adult (women who are getting abortions without their husbands knowing have the right to do it in secrecy) andthe fact that its going t lead to a lot more teenage pregnancys than there is at the moment (would you whant to teminate a pregnancy as a teenager if you think your parents could find out or would you just try to hide the lump?)
at the moment there's talk of parents being able to find out if their teenage daughter wants an abortion despite confidetiality.
I was wondering what you lot think about this
Im against it for lts of reasons... like the righs of the teenager to the same treatment as an adult (women who are getting abortions without their husbands knowing have the right to do it in secrecy) andthe fact that its going t lead to a lot more teenage pregnancys than there is at the moment (would you whant to teminate a pregnancy as a teenager if you think your parents could find out or would you just try to hide the lump?)
I AM NOT A GAY MAN!
ToadStool Circus Acts
181 posts
Location: Derbyshire
181 posts
Location: Derbyshire
Posted:
I think alot of teenagers. Couples and sexual active people are worrying about this. I think all of us dont want our parents finding out. So personally id like teenagers to be able to have a abortion without parents knowing. I think teenagers should be able to have privacy.
I think alot of teenagers. Couples and sexual active people are worrying about this. I think all of us dont want our parents finding out. So personally id like teenagers to be able to have a abortion without parents knowing. I think teenagers should be able to have privacy.
Yo-yoist, Staffer and 3 Ball and Club Juggling
'Its people like us, who make them feel talentless.'
veteran
1,359 posts
Location: London/ Surrey
1,359 posts
Location: London/ Surrey
Posted:
I think the biggest issue was whether teenagers under the age of consent for sex (i.e. 15 and under) should be allowed confidential abortions... slightly trickier issue than the 16+ range.
I think the biggest issue was whether teenagers under the age of consent for sex (i.e. 15 and under) should be allowed confidential abortions... slightly trickier issue than the 16+ range.
The optimist claims that we are living in the best of all possible worlds.
The pessimist fears this is true.
Always make time to play in the snow.
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Posted:
Would be easier if they just raised the age limit for sex to 18. Then you've got all the rights as an adult. Therefore Doctors would have to maintain confidentiality.
Rather than all this buggering around deciding on "When you're responsible".
People 15 and under (at the moment) are the responsibility of the parents, so the parents should be told. At the moment, it's the 16-17 year olds who are caught in the zone where you're neither adult nor child any more.
Would be easier if they just raised the age limit for sex to 18. Then you've got all the rights as an adult. Therefore Doctors would have to maintain confidentiality.
Rather than all this buggering around deciding on "When you're responsible".
People 15 and under (at the moment) are the responsibility of the parents, so the parents should be told. At the moment, it's the 16-17 year olds who are caught in the zone where you're neither adult nor child any more.
After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
SILVER Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
4,172 posts
Location: Hastings, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
4,172 posts
Location: Hastings, United Kingdom
Posted:
IMO 16+ fine. Your decision. You should be able to kep it confidential..
15 and under however you are still legally a child. Your parents have a right to know that you're going through a (somewhat) high risk medical procedure..
IMO 16+ fine. Your decision. You should be able to kep it confidential..
15 and under however you are still legally a child. Your parents have a right to know that you're going through a (somewhat) high risk medical procedure..
SILVER Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
2,666 posts
Location: Preston, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
2,666 posts
Location: Preston, United Kingdom
Posted:
I think when its something as seriouse as aborting your unborn baby, if your under 18 you should have your parents told. Your not really an adult at 16 anyway (well maybie you are technicly but, mature-ness wise your not)
I think when its something as seriouse as aborting your unborn baby, if your under 18 you should have your parents told. Your not really an adult at 16 anyway (well maybie you are technicly but, mature-ness wise your not)
Chief adviser to the Pharaoh, in one very snazzy mutli-coloured coat
'Time goes by so slowly for those who wait...' - Whatever Happend To Baby Madonna?
SILVER Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
4,172 posts
Location: Hastings, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
4,172 posts
Location: Hastings, United Kingdom
Posted:
But if you're legal to get pregnant surely it should be legal for you to get 'un-pregnant' and not tell your parents?
But if you're legal to get pregnant surely it should be legal for you to get 'un-pregnant' and not tell your parents?
SILVER Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
2,666 posts
Location: Preston, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
2,666 posts
Location: Preston, United Kingdom
Posted:
Well I see what you mean, but if your going for an abortion I think its universily acceptable to say you messed up kid, grow up some more.
Well I see what you mean, but if your going for an abortion I think its universily acceptable to say you messed up kid, grow up some more.
Chief adviser to the Pharaoh, in one very snazzy mutli-coloured coat
'Time goes by so slowly for those who wait...' - Whatever Happend To Baby Madonna?
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Posted:
Not necessarily, some people say "You must have this child, or I will call you a murderer and disown you for the rest of your life..."
But then, any kid with decent parents should be able to tell them.
Not necessarily, some people say "You must have this child, or I will call you a murderer and disown you for the rest of your life..."
But then, any kid with decent parents should be able to tell them.
After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
SILVER Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
2,666 posts
Location: Preston, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
2,666 posts
Location: Preston, United Kingdom
Posted:
Well dunno what the girls doing ahving unprotected sex so young tho in the first place. Silly girl, anyway I never really wanted a bebait about morals so i shall leave it there.
Well dunno what the girls doing ahving unprotected sex so young tho in the first place. Silly girl, anyway I never really wanted a bebait about morals so i shall leave it there.
Chief adviser to the Pharaoh, in one very snazzy mutli-coloured coat
'Time goes by so slowly for those who wait...' - Whatever Happend To Baby Madonna?
SILVER Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
4,172 posts
Location: Hastings, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
4,172 posts
Location: Hastings, United Kingdom
Posted:
Sometimes getting pregnant is an honest accidant, some times is pure carelessness.
However, at 16 you're legal to be having sex, therfore you should be able to erm..participate in confidential medical support should you get pregnant.
EDITED_BY: *Aimée* (1131991633)
Sometimes getting pregnant is an honest accidant, some times is pure carelessness.
However, at 16 you're legal to be having sex, therfore you should be able to erm..participate in confidential medical support should you get pregnant.
EDITED_BY: *Aimée* (1131991633)
GOLD Member
Pirate Pixie Crew Captain
8,428 posts
Location: Wales
Pirate Pixie Crew Captain
8,428 posts
Location: Wales
Posted:
Has it changed recently or is it still the fact that at 16 you can only have sex with parental consent? To marry at 16 used to involve you having to have parental consent as did having sex...... It may have changed though.
On the topic of abortion I kind of sit on the fence. I would personally never have an abortion. I have reasons for that, but I also acknowledge that there are many people that don't feel the way I do and I have no right to impose my views on, what is after all, a personal choice.
Children that are having sex and getting pregnant are putting themselves at huge risks and I feel they need counceling and help. Whether telling their parents would help with that would depend on each case. I don't think there should be a blanket mandate that says that all children under the age of 16 seeking an abortion must have their parents/guardians told. In some cases it would be wholly inappropriate and counter productive.
Has it changed recently or is it still the fact that at 16 you can only have sex with parental consent? To marry at 16 used to involve you having to have parental consent as did having sex...... It may have changed though.
On the topic of abortion I kind of sit on the fence. I would personally never have an abortion. I have reasons for that, but I also acknowledge that there are many people that don't feel the way I do and I have no right to impose my views on, what is after all, a personal choice.
Children that are having sex and getting pregnant are putting themselves at huge risks and I feel they need counceling and help. Whether telling their parents would help with that would depend on each case. I don't think there should be a blanket mandate that says that all children under the age of 16 seeking an abortion must have their parents/guardians told. In some cases it would be wholly inappropriate and counter productive.
Feed me Chocolate!!! Feed me NOW!
SILVER Member
I make my own people.
607 posts
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA
I make my own people.
607 posts
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA
Posted:
Parents being informed about their daughter getting an abortion? Preposterous!
Next thing you know, they'll want to notify the father of the child.
As you can see, it is a very slippery slope. If we're not careful, soon we'll start requiring them to notify the unborn child!
Logically, its the only way to go:
1. Children should be allowed to have sex.
2. Stuffy parents sometimes inhibit their kids sex lives.
3. Therefore, secret abortions should be allowed so that kids can continue having sex without parental interferance.
It's a dangerous world out there, with sinister people trying to reach your children and tempt them to do things like abstain until marriage. This is just one more step in their plot to end everybody's fun.
...Oh yeah, and kids should be able to commit physician assisted suicide without informing parents either. It's just the right thing to do.
Parents being informed about their daughter getting an abortion? Preposterous!
Next thing you know, they'll want to notify the father of the child.
As you can see, it is a very slippery slope. If we're not careful, soon we'll start requiring them to notify the unborn child!
Logically, its the only way to go:
1. Children should be allowed to have sex.
2. Stuffy parents sometimes inhibit their kids sex lives.
3. Therefore, secret abortions should be allowed so that kids can continue having sex without parental interferance.
It's a dangerous world out there, with sinister people trying to reach your children and tempt them to do things like abstain until marriage. This is just one more step in their plot to end everybody's fun.
...Oh yeah, and kids should be able to commit physician assisted suicide without informing parents either. It's just the right thing to do.
Woman! Not gay Man!
332 posts
Location: Hull...ish
332 posts
Location: Hull...ish
Posted:
but some underage girls would tell their parents anyway and then its their choice but if their parents could go into a clinic and say "has my daughter had an abortion?" when the girl has plainly chosen not to tell her parents is just wrong. however i can see where people are coming from with saying that underage childern should have the help and support of their parents however its a sad fact that some parents wouldnt support their children
and you can still get pregnant if you use protection a)its only 99% likely to protect you and b)the things do split and stuff
but some underage girls would tell their parents anyway and then its their choice but if their parents could go into a clinic and say "has my daughter had an abortion?" when the girl has plainly chosen not to tell her parents is just wrong. however i can see where people are coming from with saying that underage childern should have the help and support of their parents however its a sad fact that some parents wouldnt support their children
and you can still get pregnant if you use protection a)its only 99% likely to protect you and b)the things do split and stuff
I AM NOT A GAY MAN!
Scientist of Fortune
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh
Posted:
The big issue is that many parents aren't good parents, especially in a lot of the teenage pregnancy cases. Just look at some of the stories that Doc Lightning tells, and what do you do in cases where one of the parents is abusive or even the father?
Although in most cases the child should tell the parents the choice has to be left to that child overwise we wind up back in the 19th century with coathangers and back alley abortions. The doctor will always instruct the child to tell their parents in all but the most exeptional circumstances. Confidentiality has to be maintained otherwise patient/doctor trust simply breaks down.
The big issue is that many parents aren't good parents, especially in a lot of the teenage pregnancy cases. Just look at some of the stories that Doc Lightning tells, and what do you do in cases where one of the parents is abusive or even the father?
Although in most cases the child should tell the parents the choice has to be left to that child overwise we wind up back in the 19th century with coathangers and back alley abortions. The doctor will always instruct the child to tell their parents in all but the most exeptional circumstances. Confidentiality has to be maintained otherwise patient/doctor trust simply breaks down.
According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...
SILVER Member
old hand
784 posts
Location: Bristol, United Kingdom
old hand
784 posts
Location: Bristol, United Kingdom
Posted:
If one of my daughters got pregnant (okay fast forwarding maaany years here) I would be mortified if she felt she couldn't tell me regardless of how old she was. Surely a family which keeps such things secret has serious problems...
Anyway- it needs clearing up just when the state thinks we are adults...parents need to give consent for everything with minors...surely a minor is anyone under 18...and yet at 16 you can get laid/married/move out/whatever. I think a large part of the argument has been that we need to give consent for our children to be given paracetamol- and yet not an abortion. It is ridiculous hypocrisy.
I have very strong views on abortion- I would not want my kids to make a decision without hearing and seeing what I have about it.
Just for the record, I was pregnant at 19 so technically a teenage pregnancy. It was pretty much planned, and I told my mum 6 months before I conceived.
She still went nuts
If one of my daughters got pregnant (okay fast forwarding maaany years here) I would be mortified if she felt she couldn't tell me regardless of how old she was. Surely a family which keeps such things secret has serious problems...
Anyway- it needs clearing up just when the state thinks we are adults...parents need to give consent for everything with minors...surely a minor is anyone under 18...and yet at 16 you can get laid/married/move out/whatever. I think a large part of the argument has been that we need to give consent for our children to be given paracetamol- and yet not an abortion. It is ridiculous hypocrisy.
I have very strong views on abortion- I would not want my kids to make a decision without hearing and seeing what I have about it.
Just for the record, I was pregnant at 19 so technically a teenage pregnancy. It was pretty much planned, and I told my mum 6 months before I conceived.
She still went nuts
XLenX
Devoted although mostly absent owner of the 1, the original... Asena
Miss Whippy
1,262 posts
Location: Cornwall & Oxford
1,262 posts
Location: Cornwall & Oxford
Posted:
I agree with Aimee, if youre 16-17, you're deemed responsible enough to have sex so you should have confidential medical treatment. under 16s, hmm, i think the parents should be told. Though i am biased, i get on really well with my parents so would tell them at any age, not just as a teenager.
I dont agree with what someone said about if you get pregnant you messed up and its your own fault. Sorry, no way. contraception is not 100%. If theres a 12-13yr old girl, she may not know about contraception, sex education in schools is terrible (it isnt taught until 15-16), especially if the man is older, maybe predatory, how can that be the girls fault? Though thats not to say that it isnt ever the girls fault.
I agree with Aimee, if youre 16-17, you're deemed responsible enough to have sex so you should have confidential medical treatment. under 16s, hmm, i think the parents should be told. Though i am biased, i get on really well with my parents so would tell them at any age, not just as a teenager.
I dont agree with what someone said about if you get pregnant you messed up and its your own fault. Sorry, no way. contraception is not 100%. If theres a 12-13yr old girl, she may not know about contraception, sex education in schools is terrible (it isnt taught until 15-16), especially if the man is older, maybe predatory, how can that be the girls fault? Though thats not to say that it isnt ever the girls fault.
Aim high and you'll know your limits, aim low and you'll never know how high you could have climbed.
GOLD Member
addict
674 posts
Location: Ohio, USA
addict
674 posts
Location: Ohio, USA
Posted:
I live in Akron, OH, nearby Canton Ohio, which has an abstinence until marriage health education policy. 65 out of 490 women at the school this year were pregnant, that's 13%. Im not saying abstinence until marriage isn't a good idea... Im sure it works great for some people. But when I was in high school there weren't a whole lot of people who really wanted to abstain from sex. We reach sexually maturity at this age and people are surprised that "children" who are biologically adults are interested in sex? Wow, big freaking surprise. Let's blame culture and what we're teaching them!
Sorry, such attitudes really get on my nerves. How can you expect young adults to make mature descisions when you with hold vital information from them regarding the choices they are going to have to make? If you think your ever going to stop people from having sex, you have your head in the ground.
I definitely fall on the "pro-choice" side of the argument. I also believe that it is a huge privacy issue. Below 16, ok, maybe the parents should be brought in on that. But from 16 - 18, why shouldn't you be treated with the same respect that a regular adult gets regarding your personal health? "Notification" does not stop them from having an abortion. All it does is potentially ruin their relationships with their parents. Patriarch pointed out another issue I take, that of a requirement to tell the father. Now I agree that the father should be told, but at the same time I take issue with it being a REQUIREMENT for the same reason. These kids aren't having sex to get pregnant... usually anyway... These provisions only serve to humiliate and try to force individual women into NOT getting the procedure from shame. It reminds me of the Scarlet Letter.
Patriarch, I take issue with a good deal of what you said in your post. You seem to think children are just automotans, doing what we teach them to, and aren't individuals in and of themselves who make their own descisions. I think the sarcastic view you seem to have expounded is very naive and underestimates the ability of young adults ESPECIALLY to do exactly what they want instead of what their parents want.
I live in Akron, OH, nearby Canton Ohio, which has an abstinence until marriage health education policy. 65 out of 490 women at the school this year were pregnant, that's 13%. Im not saying abstinence until marriage isn't a good idea... Im sure it works great for some people. But when I was in high school there weren't a whole lot of people who really wanted to abstain from sex. We reach sexually maturity at this age and people are surprised that "children" who are biologically adults are interested in sex? Wow, big freaking surprise. Let's blame culture and what we're teaching them!
Sorry, such attitudes really get on my nerves. How can you expect young adults to make mature descisions when you with hold vital information from them regarding the choices they are going to have to make? If you think your ever going to stop people from having sex, you have your head in the ground.
I definitely fall on the "pro-choice" side of the argument. I also believe that it is a huge privacy issue. Below 16, ok, maybe the parents should be brought in on that. But from 16 - 18, why shouldn't you be treated with the same respect that a regular adult gets regarding your personal health? "Notification" does not stop them from having an abortion. All it does is potentially ruin their relationships with their parents. Patriarch pointed out another issue I take, that of a requirement to tell the father. Now I agree that the father should be told, but at the same time I take issue with it being a REQUIREMENT for the same reason. These kids aren't having sex to get pregnant... usually anyway... These provisions only serve to humiliate and try to force individual women into NOT getting the procedure from shame. It reminds me of the Scarlet Letter.
Patriarch, I take issue with a good deal of what you said in your post. You seem to think children are just automotans, doing what we teach them to, and aren't individuals in and of themselves who make their own descisions. I think the sarcastic view you seem to have expounded is very naive and underestimates the ability of young adults ESPECIALLY to do exactly what they want instead of what their parents want.
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
I strongly believe that sexual medical care (abortion, birth control, STD treatment) should be confidential.
There are teenagers who would be in mortal danger if their parents found out. And furthermore, even those teens whose parents would probably be reasonable would fail to seek medical care for sexually-related problems, such as STD's and pregnancy, if parents were to be notified.
Parental notification is probably THE single biggest barrier to proper medical care of adolescents. After all, if the teenager knows I'll tell his parents that he's drinking, smoking pot, and having sex, then he's not going to bloody well tell *me* about it, is he?
As for abstinence, abstinence is probably the *LEAST* effective form of birth control out there other than stupid ones like "rhythm" and "pulling out."
But isn't abstinence 100% effective?
No, it's not. It's not because all forms of birth control are gauged based not only on inherent effectiveness (which is 100% for abstinence) but also accounting for compliance and misuse. Condoms break, yes. But abstinence breaks a lot more easily than condoms do! And when you take into account how well abstinence works in the USA...surprise surprise surprise...the government has suppressed any such research. Because they're afraid of the truth.
But evidence from other countries shows that abstinence works much more poorly than condoms, let alone the pill. Furthermore, children taught abstinence are more likely to have unsafe sex. And while they tend to have sex at a later mean age (16-17 as opposed to 15-16) they also have beliefs that certain sexual practices, such as oral and anal sex, are not actually "sex." AND they engage in unprotected sex.
People need to realize that the drive to have sex is a powerful natural drive. It's unnatural in the scheme of things to expect people to wait until they're in their late 20's to do it. Some people can and do, yes, but in general it's not feasable.
You have to work in the scheme of it, which is that healthy teenagers do have sex. This false puritanism of abstinence and parental notification only puts teenagers at risk.
And I get
very angry when people start hurting my patients, whether directly or through bad legislation.
I strongly believe that sexual medical care (abortion, birth control, STD treatment) should be confidential.
There are teenagers who would be in mortal danger if their parents found out. And furthermore, even those teens whose parents would probably be reasonable would fail to seek medical care for sexually-related problems, such as STD's and pregnancy, if parents were to be notified.
Parental notification is probably THE single biggest barrier to proper medical care of adolescents. After all, if the teenager knows I'll tell his parents that he's drinking, smoking pot, and having sex, then he's not going to bloody well tell *me* about it, is he?
As for abstinence, abstinence is probably the *LEAST* effective form of birth control out there other than stupid ones like "rhythm" and "pulling out."
But isn't abstinence 100% effective?
No, it's not. It's not because all forms of birth control are gauged based not only on inherent effectiveness (which is 100% for abstinence) but also accounting for compliance and misuse. Condoms break, yes. But abstinence breaks a lot more easily than condoms do! And when you take into account how well abstinence works in the USA...surprise surprise surprise...the government has suppressed any such research. Because they're afraid of the truth.
But evidence from other countries shows that abstinence works much more poorly than condoms, let alone the pill. Furthermore, children taught abstinence are more likely to have unsafe sex. And while they tend to have sex at a later mean age (16-17 as opposed to 15-16) they also have beliefs that certain sexual practices, such as oral and anal sex, are not actually "sex." AND they engage in unprotected sex.
People need to realize that the drive to have sex is a powerful natural drive. It's unnatural in the scheme of things to expect people to wait until they're in their late 20's to do it. Some people can and do, yes, but in general it's not feasable.
You have to work in the scheme of it, which is that healthy teenagers do have sex. This false puritanism of abstinence and parental notification only puts teenagers at risk.
And I get
very angry when people start hurting my patients, whether directly or through bad legislation. -Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
GOLD Member
ZORT!
3,045 posts
Location: Brisbane, Australia
ZORT!
3,045 posts
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posted:
someone commented how odd it is that a school has to ask the parents to the give a kid an aspirin, but if the school find out the kid needs an abortion they dont necessarily need to inform the parents....
EDITED_BY: Dentrassi (1132023201)
someone commented how odd it is that a school has to ask the parents to the give a kid an aspirin, but if the school find out the kid needs an abortion they dont necessarily need to inform the parents....
EDITED_BY: Dentrassi (1132023201)
"Here kitty kitty...." - Schroedinger.
SILVER Member
I make my own people.
607 posts
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA
I make my own people.
607 posts
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA
Posted:
I apologize for mentioning abstinence. It seems to have caused this topic to drift. While I am tempted to respond, I shall stick to the topic at hand.
One can argue that the age at which you are considered a responsible adult should be lowered. I am particularly attracted to this argument, and have at times been willing to consider people as young as 13 or 14 to be adults (especially if they are a rapist or a murderer).
However, this does not speak directly to the issue of parental notification. The issue is not “how young is too young.” The question is whether a minor (whatever age she is) should be allowed to receive medical treatment without her parents being allowed to know.
To remove some of the emotional aspects of abortion, perhaps it would be better to ask first whether parents should be notified if their child were to undergo plastic surgery.
Like abortion, plastic surgery is usually an elective procedure that carries with it the possibility that the parents will not approve. It is also occasionally dangerous, and can have lasting physical and emotional consequences for a child.
If I were asked whether a hospital should be required to tell a parent that their child had undergone such a procedure, I would certainly say yes. The reason I would say yes is because a parent has a set of rights and responsibilities regarding their children. A parent has the responsibility, for instance, to properly care for the child’s health. I believe that they have a corresponding right to know when others have operated on their child.
I do not think a child has a right to privacy from their parents in such circumstances. A parent can and should be aware of any medical procedure that a child undergoes, from a tattoo to an amputation.
The privacy of medical information is the right of a responsible adult. However, children are, by their nature, not ready to assume full responsibility for their lives. They need the care and direction of responsible adults, such as their parents. Withholding important medical information from parents is not in the best interest of the child or the people responsible for her.
I apologize for mentioning abstinence. It seems to have caused this topic to drift. While I am tempted to respond, I shall stick to the topic at hand.
One can argue that the age at which you are considered a responsible adult should be lowered. I am particularly attracted to this argument, and have at times been willing to consider people as young as 13 or 14 to be adults (especially if they are a rapist or a murderer).
However, this does not speak directly to the issue of parental notification. The issue is not “how young is too young.” The question is whether a minor (whatever age she is) should be allowed to receive medical treatment without her parents being allowed to know.
To remove some of the emotional aspects of abortion, perhaps it would be better to ask first whether parents should be notified if their child were to undergo plastic surgery.
Like abortion, plastic surgery is usually an elective procedure that carries with it the possibility that the parents will not approve. It is also occasionally dangerous, and can have lasting physical and emotional consequences for a child.
If I were asked whether a hospital should be required to tell a parent that their child had undergone such a procedure, I would certainly say yes. The reason I would say yes is because a parent has a set of rights and responsibilities regarding their children. A parent has the responsibility, for instance, to properly care for the child’s health. I believe that they have a corresponding right to know when others have operated on their child.
I do not think a child has a right to privacy from their parents in such circumstances. A parent can and should be aware of any medical procedure that a child undergoes, from a tattoo to an amputation.
The privacy of medical information is the right of a responsible adult. However, children are, by their nature, not ready to assume full responsibility for their lives. They need the care and direction of responsible adults, such as their parents. Withholding important medical information from parents is not in the best interest of the child or the people responsible for her.
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Posted:
Patriarch, what you've just said is contradictory.
you said:
Yet here you say:
Surely, if you mean "Adults" as over 18, then how can you say that you think 14 year olds should be adult, then in another sentence say that 17 year olds need parental guidance???
I also strongly disagree with your comparison of abortion to plastic surgery.
1. You can't keep plastic surgery secret, no matter how much you might try. Therefore the point of notifying the parent is moot.
2. Terminating someone's life is slightly different to adjusting your nose. Sorry, but it is. Orders of magnitude more important I'd say...
No, it's not. The question is "Should it be mandatory to inform the parents of the pregnant child". Not whether the parent is allowed to know or not. Of course the parent is allowed IF the child consents to it.
I've agreed with you before, but not here. Sorry.
I agree with Doc though on more or less everything he said
Patriarch, what you've just said is contradictory.
you said:
Written by: Patriarch917
I am particularly attracted to this argument, and have at times been willing to consider people as young as 13 or 14 to be adults...
Yet here you say:
Written by: Patriarch917
However, children are, by their nature, not ready to assume full responsibility for their lives. They need the care and direction of responsible adults, such as their parents.
Surely, if you mean "Adults" as over 18, then how can you say that you think 14 year olds should be adult, then in another sentence say that 17 year olds need parental guidance???
I also strongly disagree with your comparison of abortion to plastic surgery.
1. You can't keep plastic surgery secret, no matter how much you might try. Therefore the point of notifying the parent is moot.
2. Terminating someone's life is slightly different to adjusting your nose. Sorry, but it is. Orders of magnitude more important I'd say...
Written by: Patriarch917
The question is whether a minor (whatever age she is) should be allowed to receive medical treatment without her parents being allowed to know.
No, it's not. The question is "Should it be mandatory to inform the parents of the pregnant child". Not whether the parent is allowed to know or not. Of course the parent is allowed IF the child consents to it.
I've agreed with you before, but not here. Sorry.
I agree with Doc though on more or less everything he said
After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
GOLD Member
addict
674 posts
Location: Ohio, USA
addict
674 posts
Location: Ohio, USA
Posted:
Ok Patriarch, I like that better.
However, by trying to remove the emotional aspects of the procedure you are doing away with a good part of the reasonable objection (and thus is a good analogy to try and make your view point). However, there is a big difference in attitudes vs. plastic surgery, piercings, tattoos, etc. and abortion / sex. You don't see people crusading for youngsters to abstain from getting their ears pierced, or their boobs augmented. You don't see high level legislative attempts to ban tattooing. For a lot of people, open sexual discourse, and such is still very much taboo. Your not going to sit down at the dinner table and discuss your sex life with mommy and daddy. It is one of the few truly taboo subjects in much of our modern culture.
For exactly that reason, it is a much different privacy subject than plastic surgery and tattoos. Also, if you don't get a tattoo or plastic surgery at 16, you can wait 2 years. There's kind of a time limit for abortion.
Because of the intensly private nature of sex in our culture, and the societal stigmas to so much of the things in this area, even more so than most other medical procedures, I feel that privacy for a sexually mature adult should be granted. And I'm willing to draw that line at 16, because though I waited until I was 18, I would have gladly not waited, and I know a good majority of people, both male and female, who were the same way. If your old enough to have sex, you are old enough to deal with the consequences, and abortion is one option as a consequence. I say 16 only because I know that 18 is too late to reach a good number of people.
Ok Patriarch, I like that better.
However, by trying to remove the emotional aspects of the procedure you are doing away with a good part of the reasonable objection (and thus is a good analogy to try and make your view point). However, there is a big difference in attitudes vs. plastic surgery, piercings, tattoos, etc. and abortion / sex. You don't see people crusading for youngsters to abstain from getting their ears pierced, or their boobs augmented. You don't see high level legislative attempts to ban tattooing. For a lot of people, open sexual discourse, and such is still very much taboo. Your not going to sit down at the dinner table and discuss your sex life with mommy and daddy. It is one of the few truly taboo subjects in much of our modern culture.
For exactly that reason, it is a much different privacy subject than plastic surgery and tattoos. Also, if you don't get a tattoo or plastic surgery at 16, you can wait 2 years. There's kind of a time limit for abortion.
Because of the intensly private nature of sex in our culture, and the societal stigmas to so much of the things in this area, even more so than most other medical procedures, I feel that privacy for a sexually mature adult should be granted. And I'm willing to draw that line at 16, because though I waited until I was 18, I would have gladly not waited, and I know a good majority of people, both male and female, who were the same way. If your old enough to have sex, you are old enough to deal with the consequences, and abortion is one option as a consequence. I say 16 only because I know that 18 is too late to reach a good number of people.
SILVER Member
I make my own people.
607 posts
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA
I make my own people.
607 posts
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA
Posted:
I apologize for being unclear. Your assumption that I mean the word “adults” to refer to those over 18 indeed makes it appear that I have contradicted myself. However, I intended that adult mean “a person that is not a child,” regardless of where we draw the age limit. This has caused you to misunderstand me.
What I was attempting to do was draw a distinction between a position that says “a 16 year old should not be considered a child, therefore the parents need not know” and a position that says “a 16 year old is a child, but parents still need not know.”
I expressed sympathy for those who think that a 16 year old should not be considered a child. However, I wanted to confine my discussion to children, whatever age we determine that to be.
In other words, I did not say that 14 year olds are adults and that 17 year olds are children who need parental guidance. I said that perhaps 14 year olds are adults, but those who are not adults (perhaps an 11 year old) need parental guidance.
I hope this makes my meaning more clear.
Certainly you are right. Abortion is far different from plastic surgery. It was simply the first major elective procedure that came to mind.
I wished to focus our discussion on the rights of children and parents to control access to their medical information. To do this, I tried to pick a more mundane example. I first contemplated using the example of taking an aspirin at school, but I figured everyone would fight the analogy as being too far removed from abortion.
I see your point. I expressed the question badly. What do you think of this statement:
“The question is whether parents have the right to know whether their daughter is having an abortion.”
I think that the law should require doctors to inform the parents of any major medical procedure their child is having.
I am tempted to kick it up a notch and suggest that, just as a child cannot legally consent to sex with an adult, or form a contract, they should not be allowed to undergo any major elective surgery without their parents consent. However, I think that this would push us off this topic's thread (which is notification, not consent). Therefore, you should ignore this paragraph.
If we decide that parents do not have the right to know about their child’s medical care, we must then determine who gets to decide when they do or don’t. Some seem to suggest that a child should get to choose, others might think this choice should be made by doctors or the government.
Do not let the nature of abortion obscure the true issue here. Abortion is held as a sacred human right by some, and it is deplored as the worst of evils by others. For those who approve of abortion, it becomes tempting to make special exceptions and concessions in its favor. For those who disapprove, it becomes tempting to deplore the fact that this situation arises at all. Your opinion on abortion, however, need not influence your opinion in this matter... if you can distill it down to the fundamental issues.
Written by: Sethis
Patriarch, what you've just said is contradictory.
you said:Written by: Patriarch917
I am particularly attracted to this argument, and have at times been willing to consider people as young as 13 or 14 to be adults...
Yet here you say:Written by: Patriarch917
However, children are, by their nature, not ready to assume full responsibility for their lives. They need the care and direction of responsible adults, such as their parents.
Surely, if you mean "Adults" as over 18, then how can you say that you think 14 year olds should be adult, then in another sentence say that 17 year olds need parental guidance???
I apologize for being unclear. Your assumption that I mean the word “adults” to refer to those over 18 indeed makes it appear that I have contradicted myself. However, I intended that adult mean “a person that is not a child,” regardless of where we draw the age limit. This has caused you to misunderstand me.
What I was attempting to do was draw a distinction between a position that says “a 16 year old should not be considered a child, therefore the parents need not know” and a position that says “a 16 year old is a child, but parents still need not know.”
I expressed sympathy for those who think that a 16 year old should not be considered a child. However, I wanted to confine my discussion to children, whatever age we determine that to be.
In other words, I did not say that 14 year olds are adults and that 17 year olds are children who need parental guidance. I said that perhaps 14 year olds are adults, but those who are not adults (perhaps an 11 year old) need parental guidance.
I hope this makes my meaning more clear.
Written by: Sethis
I also strongly disagree with your comparison of abortion to plastic surgery.
1. You can't keep plastic surgery secret, no matter how much you might try. Therefore the point of notifying the parent is moot.
2. Terminating someone's life is slightly different to adjusting your nose. Sorry, but it is. Orders of magnitude more important I'd say...
Certainly you are right. Abortion is far different from plastic surgery. It was simply the first major elective procedure that came to mind.
I wished to focus our discussion on the rights of children and parents to control access to their medical information. To do this, I tried to pick a more mundane example. I first contemplated using the example of taking an aspirin at school, but I figured everyone would fight the analogy as being too far removed from abortion.
Written by: SethisWritten by: Patriarch917
The question is whether a minor (whatever age she is) should be allowed to receive medical treatment without her parents being allowed to know.
No, it's not. The question is "Should it be mandatory to inform the parents of the pregnant child". Not whether the parent is allowed to know or not. Of course the parent is allowed IF the child consents to it.
I see your point. I expressed the question badly. What do you think of this statement:
“The question is whether parents have the right to know whether their daughter is having an abortion.”
I think that the law should require doctors to inform the parents of any major medical procedure their child is having.
I am tempted to kick it up a notch and suggest that, just as a child cannot legally consent to sex with an adult, or form a contract, they should not be allowed to undergo any major elective surgery without their parents consent. However, I think that this would push us off this topic's thread (which is notification, not consent). Therefore, you should ignore this paragraph.
If we decide that parents do not have the right to know about their child’s medical care, we must then determine who gets to decide when they do or don’t. Some seem to suggest that a child should get to choose, others might think this choice should be made by doctors or the government.
Do not let the nature of abortion obscure the true issue here. Abortion is held as a sacred human right by some, and it is deplored as the worst of evils by others. For those who approve of abortion, it becomes tempting to make special exceptions and concessions in its favor. For those who disapprove, it becomes tempting to deplore the fact that this situation arises at all. Your opinion on abortion, however, need not influence your opinion in this matter... if you can distill it down to the fundamental issues.
BRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
I agree that if the "child" in question is effectively legally allowed to get pregnant, then she should legally be able to get an abortion without informing the parents.
But I also think that younger girls should also be allowed the confidentiality. Basically because, if they can't trust their doctor, then they are more likely to do stupid things. For example, if she is pregnant because she wasn't on the pill, gets the abortion, parents find out, parents get incredibly mad, she is going to feel worthless and low and engage in more sex but as if she is going to the doctor to get on the pill because s/he would only tell the parents again! And it will just repeat itself!
As many people here have said, if I had a daughter, I would much rather I had the kind of relationship with her that she told me herself. Therefore I think perhaps the teenagers should be recomended to tell their parents, but if they aren't telling them I'm sure there is a good reason that shouldn't be breached.
I agree that if the "child" in question is effectively legally allowed to get pregnant, then she should legally be able to get an abortion without informing the parents.
But I also think that younger girls should also be allowed the confidentiality. Basically because, if they can't trust their doctor, then they are more likely to do stupid things. For example, if she is pregnant because she wasn't on the pill, gets the abortion, parents find out, parents get incredibly mad, she is going to feel worthless and low and engage in more sex but as if she is going to the doctor to get on the pill because s/he would only tell the parents again! And it will just repeat itself!
As many people here have said, if I had a daughter, I would much rather I had the kind of relationship with her that she told me herself. Therefore I think perhaps the teenagers should be recomended to tell their parents, but if they aren't telling them I'm sure there is a good reason that shouldn't be breached.
i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey
Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...
BRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
Post deleted by Rouge Dragon
Post deleted by Rouge Dragon
i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey
Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
2,084 posts
Location: melbourne, victoria, australia
Pooh-Bah
2,084 posts
Location: melbourne, victoria, australia
Posted:
i think that underage women should definitely have access to confidential abortion. women have been killed by their families for being found to have had sex before marriage, even in cases where the sex wasn't consentual. while this is the extreme outcome, there will always be women who will go to lengths so that their family does not find out about their sexual activity. if confidential abortions are not available, i can imagine that backyard abortions will be seen as an alternative. these can have disastrous effects on the woman's health.
i also think that there should be more emphasis on sex/contraception education to minimise the risk of unwanted pregnancy. there should also be more of a follow up after abortion. i'm sure that the amount of follow up varies between places, but i think there should be higher standards.
when i was 15, one of my friends had an abortion. both her and her boyfriend weren't too switched on, and their idea of contraception was hoping for the best, since he 'didn't like wearing condoms' and they couldn't think of an alternative. after her abortion, she was given a script for the pill, which she never filled, because it was 'too expensive'. she eventually became pregnant again, and got another abortion. as well as indicating that she didn't have a good grasp on cause and effect, it shows that the follow up was not adequate for her needs.
i think that underage women should definitely have access to confidential abortion. women have been killed by their families for being found to have had sex before marriage, even in cases where the sex wasn't consentual. while this is the extreme outcome, there will always be women who will go to lengths so that their family does not find out about their sexual activity. if confidential abortions are not available, i can imagine that backyard abortions will be seen as an alternative. these can have disastrous effects on the woman's health.
i also think that there should be more emphasis on sex/contraception education to minimise the risk of unwanted pregnancy. there should also be more of a follow up after abortion. i'm sure that the amount of follow up varies between places, but i think there should be higher standards.
when i was 15, one of my friends had an abortion. both her and her boyfriend weren't too switched on, and their idea of contraception was hoping for the best, since he 'didn't like wearing condoms' and they couldn't think of an alternative. after her abortion, she was given a script for the pill, which she never filled, because it was 'too expensive'. she eventually became pregnant again, and got another abortion. as well as indicating that she didn't have a good grasp on cause and effect, it shows that the follow up was not adequate for her needs.
GOLD Member
addict
674 posts
Location: Ohio, USA
addict
674 posts
Location: Ohio, USA
Posted:
She should have gone to planned parenthood. They will help with the price of the prescription for the pill if you are under the age of 18.
And see! That is something that should be taught in every health education class! So few people know about the options around them that they can go look into.
Oh... and then I noticed your in Australia so I guess that point is moot. Oh well. In the US anyway, contraception is free for people under the age of 18 if you know where to go.
She should have gone to planned parenthood. They will help with the price of the prescription for the pill if you are under the age of 18.
And see! That is something that should be taught in every health education class! So few people know about the options around them that they can go look into.
Oh... and then I noticed your in Australia so I guess that point is moot. Oh well. In the US anyway, contraception is free for people under the age of 18 if you know where to go.
BRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
You can get the pill in australia for as little as $4 a 'script (for a 4 month supply!) but i'm not sure how to get it.
You can get the pill in australia for as little as $4 a 'script (for a 4 month supply!) but i'm not sure how to get it.
i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey
Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...
Dreamer
4,308 posts
Location: York, England
4,308 posts
Location: York, England
Posted:
i8beefy2-
it IS??? I grew up in america. Sure didn't know anything about free contraception (tho i managed some at universities). Here in the UK it DOES seem to be readily adn easily available, but where would i have gone in the US? (Our local planned parenthood didn't give out much, one condom if you had an appointment maybe. There's some possibility a shelter or something would have but a teenager wouldn't go in there without good reason.....
i8beefy2-
it IS??? I grew up in america. Sure didn't know anything about free contraception (tho i managed some at universities). Here in the UK it DOES seem to be readily adn easily available, but where would i have gone in the US? (Our local planned parenthood didn't give out much, one condom if you had an appointment maybe. There's some possibility a shelter or something would have but a teenager wouldn't go in there without good reason.....
Keep your dream alive
Dreamin is still how the strong survive
Shalom VeAhavah
New Hampshire has a point....
SILVER Member
old hand
784 posts
Location: Bristol, United Kingdom
old hand
784 posts
Location: Bristol, United Kingdom
Posted:
I think the main sticking point here is that there is no right answer.
I mean, abortion is something many people feel is morally wrong.
Underage sex is also something many feel is morally wrong.
Many others don't.
I also understand the points raised about the mothers (and I guess fathers too) lives being in danger due to religions etc.
Maybe the decision to tell or not to tell/get parental consent and all that should be assessed for each individual case?
Alot of girls may think their parents would go mad when in fact they would be unconditionally supportive, and a third party may see that and decide which action is best for the child.
I still think clarification in the law of exactly when we are considered adults would help tho.
I think the main sticking point here is that there is no right answer.
I mean, abortion is something many people feel is morally wrong.
Underage sex is also something many feel is morally wrong.
Many others don't.
I also understand the points raised about the mothers (and I guess fathers too) lives being in danger due to religions etc.
Maybe the decision to tell or not to tell/get parental consent and all that should be assessed for each individual case?
Alot of girls may think their parents would go mad when in fact they would be unconditionally supportive, and a third party may see that and decide which action is best for the child.
I still think clarification in the law of exactly when we are considered adults would help tho.
XLenX
Devoted although mostly absent owner of the 1, the original... Asena
© 1998 - 2024 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com