First Abortion Case Under New Supreme Court

Remove all ads!

The Supreme Court has taken on its first abortion case since Roberts was appointed as Chief Justice. In the past, the results of such hearings were usually predictable, but with one new member, and another new one on the way, the outcome is less certain. Basically they're hearing a case on whether or not minor must inform their parents prior to getting an abortion.

Here's the whole story :

I'm kind of on the fence with this, mainly because I am uncertain if it's even legal for a doctor to perform any type of medical procedure on a minor without parental approval. If you need a parent consent to get a flu shot, it certainly seems like you'd need it to get an abortion. And who's paying for it anyway? Abortions aren't cheap, and assuming if they are insured it's under the parent's plan, how are they going to pay for it without the parent's knowing about it? Note the case involves parental notification, not necessarily parental consent, but once they are notified, I'd imagine they could prevent consent from being given.

 

I believe that's a straight no. But any parent who would deny their child's well-being should be shot.
NOTE: I am not saying that the abortion would be in the child's best interest. But if it did come down to that...

 

The parental consent has always bothered me with abortion. Last weekend me and mrs. went to my 20 year high school reunion. Little Snook slept over a friends house. Because we were unreachable we gave the mom his medical card and a note authorizing her to make any medical decisions that were necessary. We did this because my Aunt recently had an issue with her granddaughter. Her granddaughter fell off a swing and hurt her arm. The hospital wouldn't do anything because a parent wasn't there, even though the kid was screaming her head off in pain (I guess if she was unconscious they would have done something). This is the way they handle the ten and under crowd. I'm not sure why they handle a sixteen year old pregnant girl any different. Last time I checked the law made majority 18, without a special exemption for pregnant girls. If these same girls went to a plastic surgeon for a nose or breast job would he do it without a parental consent? I don't think so.

For the record I am very pro-choice and believe there should be a method for pregnant minors to get an abortion absent parental consent, I'm just not sure what that method should be. I don't know who I would trust, and by the time the courts could decide the baby might be born or the mother too far along to have the abortion.

 

Yeah, that's the issue I have with the law. It seems like requiring parental notification prior to getting an abortion if you're a minor appears, at least on the surface, to be superfulous, as the minor wouldn't be able to get the abortion anyway. However, it appears that it may be possible to get an abortion without parental approval, because this law exists. Does anyone know?

 

Everyone always blames parents when anything goes wrong with a kid, then the same people pointing fingers turn around and try to deny parents any say in the lives of their children. You can't have it both ways. I think that parents should have to give consent before a child has a procedure as drastic as an abortion. If in a few years the now adult girl wishes to give up the baby she can easily do so. But until the age of 18 the children are still under the care of their parents and as such the wishes of the parents should be respected.