I hate the fact that girls have to face these issues while the boys who helped conceive the child can go on their merry way. I think that's another reason why I support the no parental piece. Girls will automatically have the emotional fall out of a pregnancy and abortion. Must they also face the fall out of sharing this information if they don't want to? The boys have none of the above unless they choose to (and, yes, I know some do).

I'm not sure a "right to parent" is at issue here-- it seems to be a "right to stop your child's abortion."

Right to weigh in, right to guide, right to encourage, right to support, right to discuss, right to parent. Right to stop? I wouldn't support that.

But you of course have those rights, and they're simply not at issue here-- this is not a law that hinders good parenting, or somehow prevents you from parenting. The positive obligation is on telling a parent whose child does not want guidance, encouragement, support, discussion-- all the way to forcing the issue with a court order.

You mean like force an abortion against the minor's will?

Yes, that or force an adoption.

I truly believe the harm for those teens who are at the mercy of horrible parents, parents who do NOT have their best interests at heart--outweighs the (very real) needs of good parents at this point in history. I hope that things progress so that is no longer the case, as I agree that teenagers would benefit from having support from concerned and caring parents.

Although now I'm entertained by the mental image of a teacher trying to confiscate my Midol.

As long as your Midol was in your bag and you didn't, e.g., pop it into your mouth while looking straight in a teacher's eyes and saying "I dare you to punish me," you'd probably be fine.

I think it's meant to deter both dealing and possible lawsuits if a kid had an allergic reaction or the like. Stupid rule, but most zero-tolerance stuff is.

In this case, it's statutory rape and covered under those laws.

But would Planned Parenthood (or whoever) report that to the authorities?

If they knew about, they are legally obligated to report the abuse.

Oh yeah, healthcare providers are mandatory reporters of abuse of all kinds.

Seems to me that if we need to write a law, rather than just let people use their own best judgment, then writing a law that says "tell the parents" protects a lot fewer people than writing a law that says "don't tell the parents."

Where is the proof of that, though? There are safeguards for children in abusive situations. To the extent that those aren't working, our energy should be focused on fixing those problems, rather than on helping children circumvent the involvement of good parents. Also, if a kid is going to be abused because she is pregnant, 99.9% of the time, isn't she already in an abusive situation?

Parental disappointment, new limits, and even parental anger (appropriately expressed) do not equal abuse.

Where children need to inform a parent, isn't there typically an escape clause can go to a judge to circumvent the parental notification in extreme situations? How can we even count to know how many girls ultimately suffered more (although granted, perhaps in less acute ways), because their parents didn't know this enormous thing that happened in their life?

Pardon my ignorance, but does parental notification also mean parental consent?

Per Planned Parenthood, [link] it's a mix. Some states have no laws on this. Some require consent of both parents. Some require consent of one. Some require no consent, but do requiring informing one or both parents. I don't think PP breaks that down, but there are differing requirements from state to state. Some of the states allow a grandparent, aunt, uncle, step-parent, or mental health practitioner, as an alternative to a parent.

I am not agitating for consent, just notification, by the by.

Also, if a kid is going to be abused because she is pregnant, 99.9% of the time, isn't she already in an abusive situation?

I don't think you want to commit to this argument.

healthcare providers are mandatory reporters of abuse of all kinds

Interesting. I think I'd heard a radio story about this research (very biased pro-life site on the other side of the link), and misremembered it. Is there a more spin-free site that discusses the findings?

Edit: This is a pro-choice response, and here's Salon's take.