Abortion Rights - Taking away "a critical safety valve for teens"

[_TJ_]

Taking away "a critical safety valve for teens"

On Wednesday, the House Judiciary Committee moved forward a bill that would make it very difficult for a minor to obtain an abortion without notifying her parents. Currently, over 30 states have some sort of mandatory parental notification law. Although statistics show that most young girls typically involve their parents in the decision to have an abortion, an unknown number cross state lines to avoid it. The Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act, sent to the House floor for a full vote (where it's expected to pass), would make that nearly impossible.

Introduced by Florida Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehinten, the bill has two separate provisions. The first would make it a criminal offense (punishable by up to year of jail time) for someone who isn't a parent or guardian to transport a minor across state lines for an abortion, if coming from a state with strict parental-notice laws. The other provision would require abortion clinics in states that have no notification laws to call a minor's parents and let them know where their daughter is, or face criminal charges. (There is one exception in which the young woman could try to plead her case before a judge in her home state and obtain a judicial waiver bypassing the parental notice requirement.)

Reproductive rights groups are worried that the bill will endanger young women who have strong reason to keep their abortion plans to themselves. "This bill cuts off a critical safety valve for teens who can't involve a parent in their decision," Jennifer Dalven, of the ACLU's Reproductive Freedom Project, told War Room. "Either in cases where a parent is abusive, or has threatened to kick them out of the house if they got pregnant, or if they have religious parents who would force them to carry the pregnancy to term."

Similar versions of the bill have been around for at least seven years. Legislation has passed in the House three times, but Senate Democrats have prevented it from coming up for a vote. Still, pro-choice advocates may want to take the situation even more seriously now: This year, Republican senators have put it on their list of top ten priorities. It's still a long-shot to pass, but the Senate gained several more antiabortion lawmakers last November, and is inching closer to the number of votes needed to empower the pro-life agenda.

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/index.html

[meow2u3]

1. The parents ought to be prosecuted if that's the case

If parents threaten to kick a girl out of their home for the kid getting pregnant, they ought to be charged with child abandonment. Personally, the mere threat of abandonment is tantamount to their forcing their daughter to get an abortion. That girl shouldn't have to choose between her baby and her parents.

[Patiod]

2. So when does more widespread distribution of RU486 kick in?

I've always believed that as access to safe, clean surgical abortion becomes more and more limited, either through intimidation of physicians, protests in front of clinics, selective enforcement of zoning near clinics, of state/federal restrictions, that use of RU486 will increase, especially in cases like these.

And if religious zealots manage to get it banned, it will just go underground, and be about as difficult to get as weed.

I know that it's now used in all 50 states and DC, but don't know much about the details, whether use has increased, where it's being prescribed, etc.

[Bridget Burke]

3. They're doing this in Texas, too.

There's already a law requiring parental notification when a minor needs an abortion. But a judge's permission can be sought when necessary. Like when Dad would kill her; or when Dad is the father of the fetus, too.

Now they're trying to get rid of that exception.