I'm totally sending my kids to Auntie Allyson for The Talk.
Me, too.
I, fortunately, was 18 when I had mine so I didn't have t tell my mother. Thing is, she went through an abortion when my oldest sister was 16. Of course, that older sister got pregnant again at 18, hid it from my parents until a week before she had the child.
Both my parents could have dealt with me having an abortion--after the tears, yelling and recrimination. And yet. Didn't tell them. Never told them. Will never tell them. It didn't hurt me to not have them to turn to. I had a friend and my other sister to provide support and hussle me through the asshole protesters trying to stop me from entering the clinic.
Any parenting my parents needed to do, they did way before I got pregnant. It was my own mistake and my own choice. And I don't think the year between 17 and 18 meant a bit of difference in my maturity level so the law would have just made an already tough situation that much harder for me.
I do think my parents are a lot better off not knowing to this day.
I didn't watch TV last night-- was this visible?
Good lord, he's the Republican John Edwards.
Is the guy in the foreground wanking? Or am I seeing self-love where it doesn't exist?
Could just be a "comfort hold". I've seen some guys do that in their sleep.
It seems like hyperbole, and maybe I can't avoid it, but your kids don't need your consent to have some stranger who doesn't have your kids' best interest at heart inject their bodily fluids into your kids' bodies, which is really what sex is. A penis is like the world's grossest hypodermic needle. Could get you pregnant, could give you syphillis.
As medical procedures go, getting one pregnant (or diseased) doesn't require any formal training.
No law can keep my kids from eating the toadstools in my yard, either. I don't object to the hyperbole, but it's a bit like me pointing out my kids can sign up for the 12 CDs for a penny, and then say, "HA! I'm a minor, I don't have to buy any more at your stinking low club prices." There is no way to prevent people from doing lots of things. But we do have laws regulating certain areas, including consent to intercourse, by the way.
Abortions aren't provided (thankfully) by just any dick. They are provided by licensed medical practitioners, whose very practice is regulated by the law, as are hospitals and clinics. We routinely put restrictions upon and make requirements of healtcare providers already, to ensure patients get the care they need. We also make requirements of parents in the area of parenting their children, and when they do not meet those requirements, they can be subject to prosecution for neglect.
Does a minor need parental consent to receive a prescription for birth control pills?
Per here (I've no idea how accurate this is): [link]
no state explicitly requires parental consent for contraceptive services; testing or treatment for sexually transmitted diseases including HIV; counseling and medical care for drug and alcohol abuse; or outpatient mental health services. In at least half the states, minors have the explicit authority to consent to contraceptive services and to prenatal care and delivery services. Moreover, 34 states and the District of Columbia explicitly permit a minor mother to place her child for adoption without her own parents' permission or knowledge."
Does one need to show ID to buy condoms in any of the states?
I don't know, but probably not. Abortion, however, is a surgical procedure, and there are after-effects you don't (or at least I haven't) seen with contraceptive use. I do not have the ability to compare the possible physical after-effects, and specifically the morbidity rates for the pill vs. legal medical abortion.
I don't think you want to commit to this argument.
Fine.
Are children who are brought up in loving, non-abusive homes, by non-abusive parents, typically abused when they get pregnant as teens, or are they talked to (and yeah, maybe yelled at, at first), and possibly disciplined, and given tighter restrictions (which, yes, may chafe mightily) along with medical care and emotional support?
Are children who are abused when their parents learn of their unintended pregnancies typically from otherwise loving, non-abusive situations, or are they typically abused, in general, as well?
How would we define abuse? In other words, are most instances of child abuse of pregnant teens aberrations, or par for the course? I am only talking about reasonable definitions of abuse, by the way. A parent yelling or crying out of shock, won't cut it with me, provided he gets control of himself and, while probably disappointed and maybe even angry, does what he needs to do, to care for his child responsibly.
I'm not saying all parents are going to handle it great right out of the gate, or perfectly at
any
point in the process. The anti-chattel argument does not cut it with me though, because a parent is actually legally responsible for the health and welfare of his child until age 18. He is otherwise responsible to see that his child gets necessary medical care. If a child has an infection (not abortion related, just a garden variety infection) and her parents don't seek medical care, they can be (continued...)
( continues...) subject to investigation and prosecution for neglect. Yet here, a doctor can render this surgery, and many abortion rights advocates would fight to allow that this be concealed from the parents who are legally responsible for the child,
even in cases where the parents are not abusive.
How are they to provide the care she needs, if the doctors can operate on her, without informing them?
Why don't we just free parents from all responsibility for their children, once they can read, subtract, add, or at most by the onset of menses? We don't, because we believe they need parenting until they are of an age where they are able to make informed decisions, and give informed consent. This age has been (somewhat arbitrarily) set at 18. You can't have a beer legally, until you're 21, but you can have an abortion without your parents knowledge at any age, in some states.
In re this country, I plan to go down fighting.
Of course, on this board, mostly I'd amend that to "if you ask nicely." Bad dum pum.
(Ok, way inappropriate lighter note.)
{{Cash}}
Abortion, however, is a surgical procedure, and there are after-effects you don't (or at least I haven't) seen with contraceptive use.
What about the morning after pill? No surgery required.
What about the morning after pill? No surgery required.
If it doesn't take, they could have to follow up with a surgical abortion. I forget what the % of failure in RU486 is.
What about the morning after pill? No surgery required.
It's important to distinguish between the morning after pill -- superconcentrated birth control pills that prevent implantation -- and chemical abortion through RU-486. I'm sure you wouldn't do this, but a lot of people seem to blur the two, when they're very different.
What about the morning after pill? No surgery required.
It pings me far less. I'm not crazy about the idea that my kids could get any medication without my knowledge, but I know it's less (overall) risky for my kid to go on b.c. pills, than to conceive, provided she takes precaution against disease, as well. Assuming the risk of the morning after pill is more or less the same as B.C. pills, I think it's a different kettle of fish.
