ND: No Prenatal Care for Teens w/out Parental Permission

[ducklite]

I think parents should be told if their minor child is pregnant.

Here's a scenario. Girl knows she's pregnant. She doesn't want to tell her parents. Rather than telling them, she just doesn't bother to get care.

Under this new bill there are two options for a child. Tell your parents, or don't get care. Some girls are just not going to tell. They could be scared of being kicked out of the house. Scared of being beaten. There are a ton of reasons they don't want the parents to know.

Given the two choices, I'd rather they be able to get prenatal care.

Anne

 

[ducklite]

you said:

"and various groups who advocate pro-life choices who are happy to cover medical bills"

You brought it into the discussion, I read that to mean that pro-choice people would be willing to pay for a teen to subvert parental authority. Perhaps I read it wrong.

I was merely giving factual options. My statement had nothing to do with subverting authority, just facts.

Anne

 

[iloveboardwalk]

Here's a scenario. Girl knows she's pregnant. She doesn't want to tell her parents. Rather than telling them, she just doesn't bother to get care.

Under this new bill there are two options for a child. Tell your parents, or don't get care. Some girls are just not going to tell. They could be scared of being kicked out of the house. Scared of being beaten. There are a ton of reasons they don't want the parents to know.

Given the two choices, I'd rather they be able to get prenatal care.

Anne

While I certainly feel for this hypothetical girl, I am not going to just hand over my parental rights.

There are all kinds of hypothetical situations. Despite there being parent free medical care available to teen girls in many, many places, some of them decide for whatever reason to not sek care anyway. Should we madate monthly pregnancy tests in high schools to remedy this situation? I mean there are a lot of things that "could" happen, but I think throwing the baby out with the bathwater is not the best solution.

I could get hit by a bus tomorrow, hypothetically ANYONE could. Should we ban buses?

 

[iloveboardwalk]

I was merely giving factual options. My statement had nothing to do with subverting authority, just facts.

Anne

ok, my bad.

 

[ducklite]

Well I'm not sure what the option might be. I am in favor of discussing it and trying to find other options. I don't think I necessarily need to have the answer though. I am not going to just let go of my parental rights just because some teens won't go to their parents.

As I see it, under the new law, a child who won't tell her parents has two choices.

1. Run away.
2. Get no prenatal care.

The third might be to cross a state line to get care, but obviously that would only work for a small number of kids.

Of course if I had a daughter int aht situation, I would hope she could come to me. But that's not going to happen for all girls, and we need to be realistic about it. And given the options, it seems that this law is going to hurt the unborn child the most.

Anne

 

[iloveboardwalk]

As I see it, under the new law, a child who won't tell her parents has two choices.

1. Run away.
2. Get no prenatal care.

The third might be to cross a state line to get care, but obviously that would only work for a small number of kids.

Of course if I had a daughter int aht situation, I would hope she could come to me. But that's not going to happen for all girls, and we need to be realistic about it. And given the options, it seems that this law is going to hurt the unborn child the most.

Anne

Given all that, and keeping in mind that I'm still open to trying to find solutions for the hypothetical teen in this situation, I am still not willing to cede my parental authority. I'm not much on all or nothing solutions.

Perhaps a teen could apply for emancipation through the family court. If a parent is going to be stripped of their rights, they should at least be allowed to be relieved of the responsibility and financial obligation as well.

 

[babynurse31]

If you look at the statistics, the majority of teens who get pregnant do not seek prenatal care (or consistent prenatal care) unless there is an adult involved in helping the teen navigate the system and prompting them to seek care. Most likely this bill would accomplish very little in terms of increasing prenatal care of teen moms.

 

[shirleyb]

http://www.bismarcktribune.com/articles/2007/03/24/news/state/130832.txt



They thought it was a good idea to give pregnant teen girls an incentive NOT to get prenatal care? I don't see how anyone on any side of the political spectrum could think that would be a good thing. What is wrong with these legislators?

(Although I do have to say, I think the logic of parental permission for prenatal care and all other pregnancy related medical care does follow from the logic of parental consent laws for abortion. I've never understood why one needs parental permission to have an abortion but not to continue a pregnancy, when the latter is known to be more dangerous.)

If my daughter needs my permission to get her ears pierced, she should need it for any medical care.

 

[shirleyb]

Here's a scenario. Girl knows she's pregnant. She doesn't want to tell her parents. Rather than telling them, she just doesn't bother to get care.

Under this new bill there are two options for a child. Tell your parents, or don't get care. Some girls are just not going to tell. They could be scared of being kicked out of the house. Scared of being beaten. There are a ton of reasons they don't want the parents to know.

Given the two choices, I'd rather they be able to get prenatal care.

Anne

It's not like they're going to be able to hide it forever. They're going to have to tell their parents at some point. It's not a secret that's easily kept. (at least for most people)

 

[Forevryoung]

Forget about care vs. no care- this concerns me in a different light:

What if the Teen and her parents don't agree about what should be done about the pregnancy???? Who gets the choice then?

What if the parents are against abortion so they wont sign the paperwork even though the teen wants (and understands and agrees) to one.

Or what if the parents want their teen to get an abortion and she doesn't want one... The parents could technically sign off on it and it gives no right to the teen...

I haven't read the law but THIS is a bigger issue then care vs no care-

 

[smartestnumber5]

Forget about care vs. no care- this concerns me in a different light:

What if the Teen and her parents don't agree about what should be done about the pregnancy???? Who gets the choice then?

What if the parents are against abortion so they wont sign the paperwork even though the teen wants (and understands and agrees) to one.

Or what if the parents want their teen to get an abortion and she doesn't want one... The parents could technically sign off on it and it gives no right to the teen...

I haven't read the law but THIS is a bigger issue then care vs no care-

Well in a case in which the teen wants the abortion and the parent wants to force her to remain pregnant, the parent wins no question in the states with consent laws (as far as I know at least). I can only assume this is exactly what politicians and pro-life groups were banking on when they passed the law--that many parents would stop their teens from aborting. (I certainly have no doubt that the consent laws would have passed if politicians and pro-life groups thought that many parents would actually force their daughters to have abortions.)

I don't know what happens when the parent wants to force an unwilling teen to have an abortion. Legally if they can force her to be pregnant, it only follows that they should be allowed to force her to have the abortion as well.

I was actually wondering since everyone is making so much of parental authority, what about the teen's parental authority over her fetus? Or for that matter, what about a 17 year old who has birthed a child? I assume a 17 year old mother can be the legal guardian of her own child? (I've never heard otherwise at least.) So imagine a case 9 months into a pregnancy in which the pregnant 17 teen year old's unborn baby will die unless she has a c-section. Do the parents of the teen have the legal parental authority to refuse to allow her to have the c-section, thus causing her baby's death? And if so, doesn't this violate the teen's legal parental authority?

Personally I think that regarding ALL medical procedure that requires parental consent, there should be a system of judicial bypass in which an older child can overrule the parents. I know sometimes teens are granted the right to make their own medical decisions in some cases. And regarding abortion states which require parental consent for abortion are constitutionally required to have a judicial bypass procedure (which the parents never know about). Unfortunately these systems are largely a joke. A professor of mine did research on the Pennsylvania system and found 2/3 of the courthouses in the county were completely unprepared to deal with a judicial bypass. Most didn't know what it even was. Some had no judges willing to even hear the request since it involved abortion. And sometimes the person requesting the bypass couldn't get past the receptionist who told her how abortion is murder.

I tend to be suspicious of the movement to add laws to the books to protect parental authority to force their teenagers to do or not do certain things regarding their reproductive health. My mother was always very in favor of such laws; she always said, "Well if you were having an abortion, I'd want to know about it." I always thought, "Well if you wanted me to tell you that I was going to have an abortion, all you had to do was encourage an open atmosphere where we could talk about sex and where I'd know that you'd support me in any reproductive decision I make in the chance of an unplanned pregnancy." But my mother didn't really do that when I was a teen, so I likely would not have told her about getting an abortion. A law that forced me to do so would just have sent me to the next state over.

 

[rigs32]

But wouldn't the cost of this care fall under the insured parents plan.

It likely would, but so does the medical care for college students who are mostly over 18. That's actually a huge problem. As an example from my work experience, a student is 19. She is on her parent's medical insurance. Student is taken to a hospital for mental health observation after some suicidal ideations. Student knows that mom will just yell at her and make things worse, so asks that mom and dad not be told. Because student is on parent's insurance, the hospital refuses treatment unless they speak to mom or dad. What to do?

I am over 18. I am on my husband's insurance. A hospital would never dream of getting his permission to treat me. Why would the hospital need permission for an adult child?

 

[iloveboardwalk]

It likely would, but so does the medical care for college students who are mostly over 18. That's actually a huge problem. As an example from my work experience, a student is 19. She is on her parent's medical insurance. Student is taken to a hospital for mental health observation after some suicidal ideations. Student knows that mom will just yell at her and make things worse, so asks that mom and dad not be told. Because student is on parent's insurance, the hospital refuses treatment unless they speak to mom or dad. What to do?

I am over 18. I am on my husband's insurance. A hospital would never dream of getting his permission to treat me. Why would the hospital need permission for an adult child?

We're not talking about adult children here. we're talking about minor children.

 

[Caradana]

Would I want that law for myself and my daughter? Sure. That's because I'm a reasonable person who isn't going to beat the crap out of her.

Would I want that law for the 15-year-old girl in the city whose stepfather "visits her at night" while mom cowers, because he makes all the money and she has no marketable skills? No. Never. I want to empower that girl to do the best she can for herself, by herself, because she's not going to get anything from her parents besides smashed teeth, fear, trauma and probably homelessness.

If I can't fix the world for her - I'm not adding an onerous law to the burden she is already carrying.

 

[iloveboardwalk]

Would I want that law for myself and my daughter? Sure. That's because I'm a reasonable person who isn't going to beat the crap out of her.

.

This is the vast majority.

As I said, I'm not opposed to trying to find solutions for the other hypothetical girl. I'm not willing to just toss up my hands and cede parental authority though. Again, all or nothing solutions are lazy and wrong.

 

[ducklite]

It's not like they're going to be able to hide it forever. They're going to have to tell their parents at some point. It's not a secret that's easily kept. (at least for most people)

Tell that to the babies found in dumpsters, toilets, bushes, etc. This link talks about the NJ Safe Haven Law and gives statistics on how many children were abandoned prior to the law---including at least two cases that made the national headlines--the "NJ prom mom" (there was another, almost identical case in Ontario, Canada at about the same time) and the Grossberg baby. In both of those cases the girls completely hid the pregnancy from everyone--Grossbergs boyfriend knew. I think it is quite safe to assume that most of the mothers who used Safe Haven hid their pregnancies.

Anne

 

[Kath2003]

Whilst I believe that the teenager in question should be heavily encouraged to talk with her parents, offered counseling and other support, I don't believe that it should be mandatory for parents to become involved. It can cause more emotional harm than good to a young girl, especially if her parents make a decision she doesn't agree with.

What age does she become legally responsible? There was a law suit in the UK where a mother demanded to be informed prior to an abortion if one of her daughters were to get pregnant (they were like 10 and 12 at the time), until the age of 16. She lost, thank goodness.

It:
a) encourages girls to seek out other forms of prenatal "care"
b) encourages girls to wait until they are over the age of personal consent for prenatal treatment. For example, if a girl is two or three months from the age of personal consent, she'd be more inclined to hide the pregnancy before seeking help - something which can be more dangerous to both her and her unborn child.

Encourage, yes.
Mandate, no.

 

[cybrkitn]

As long as minors remain the legal and financial responsibility of parents, then parents should not be kept out of the loop in regards to medical care. I know it's not very politically correct of me. Where did anyone ever come up with the idea that Doctors should be allowed to treat minor children without a parent's consent except in the case of emergencies?

I agree 100%, so we'll be Un-PC together . Minors are still maturing and may not fully understand things as an adult would. There were plenty of things that I thought I "knew" when I was a teen. As an adult, I can see how wrong and immature I was. Now in hind sight I can't believe at some of the things I had done or said back then . I'm actually appalled at myself

But I did know one thing back then - I was not ready to have a baby at 17/18so DH (by BF back then) and I took precautions to make sure that didn't happen.

 

[smartestnumber5]

But I did know one thing back then - I was not ready to have a baby at 17/18so DH (by BF back then) and I took precautions to make sure that didn't happen.

How did you get the precautions without your parent's consent? (Something over the counter I assume?)

 

[sha_lyn]

As long as minors remain the legal and financial responsibility of parents, then parents should not be kept out of the loop in regards to medical care. I know it's not very politically correct of me. Where did anyone ever come up with the idea that Doctors should be allowed to treat minor children without a parent's consent except in the case of emergencies?

Add me to the un-PC list
I just never got the argument that somehow abortions or prenatial care don't qualify as non emergency medical care.