Posted by
Playful Walrus on Wednesday, September 24, 2008 6:11:42 PM
Los Angeles Times staff writer Patrick McGreevy covers what is going on with Prop 4, which would institute parental notification before an abortion is performed on a minor (that is, in addition to the baby being slaughtered, who is always a minor). Governor Schwarzenegger actually supports the measure.
Similar measures were put before the voters in 2005 and 2006 and lost by slim margins both times.
Polls show that the most recent proposal is still struggling to gain support from a majority of voters, but backers such as winemaker Don Sebastiani and publisher Jim Holman say they are determined to accomplish this year what they didn't previously. And they have changed the measure's text to address some criticisms of those earlier proposals.
There’s no satisfying the usual suspects, though.
Opponents argue that parental notification laws can endanger young women who become pregnant.
"They don't increase family communication," ACLU attorney Maggie Crosby said during a legislative hearing last week.
Try using the same reasoning as justification for not informing parents about anything else going on with their kid. Sounds ridiculous doesn’t it? If these girls are in abusive homes, they are already endangered. At least with Prop 4, they will have more motivation to get help.
The measure would also require the minor to give consent.
That’s one of the real sticking points. Forced abortions on minor would be illegal. But that kind of thing bothers the self-proclaimed “choice” people.
All statutory rapists oppose Prop 4.
Crosby, the ACLU attorney, said she believes that provision is part of an effort to put abortion clinics and doctors out of business through litigation.
Why, do doctors have a problem saying something to the parents of minor patients?
The particulars are here.