Should teen girls be required to notify their parents if they get an abortion?

[Antiganon]

HIPAA is kind of up for discussion I think in this case since the child belongs to the father too, but unless the mother and father are legally married or something, you're right in that it could apply...I just think it's a grey area here.

As far as 4th amendment though, it states "unreasonable search and seizures." I don't think the biological father being consulted would be considered unreasonable, under consensual circumstances. There are obviously exceptions to that.

HIPAA applies to your spouse as well, unless you sign a consent form. When my wife's doctor calls, they will not give me any information other than "We are trying to reach so and so, please have her give us a call" unless she has filled out consent forms in their offices.

This is annoying, because she wants me to have that information, but the office doesn't give her the consent form until she specifically asks for it. Her GP and her OB have me on file, but the orthopedic she went to that one time for a broken arm does not, nor the neurologist she saw for migraines that one time, etc.

4th amendment applies because looking through somebody's medical records, without their consent, unless you are a medical provider and the information is material to you providing care, constitutes an unreasonable search.

- - - Updated - - -

The problem I have with many of the posts in this thread is twofold:

1. Basing your position upon an appeal to authority or to popularity, which is not an argument for *why* something should or shouldn't be done.

2. Many posters in this thread have built their way of reasoning around starting at the outcome that they want, and then working backwards from there. This is a faulty way of using logic, because it presupposes the most fundamental principle of philosophy: what should I want?

We gave you the moral arguments first - that the woman's (teenage girl in this case) bodily autonomy trumps all, so the abortion can't require consent of anyone else. We gave you the argument against parental notification, that the girl would no longer have true autonomy in a situation where the parents are required to be informed ahead of time, and that she may face undue punishment in a post-hoc notification scenario.

You responded by saying unironically that our positions meant we must be supportive of the rights of 12 year old girls to prostitute themselves, or we were internally inconsistent and arguing in bad faith.

Tell me, who is arguing from a foregone conclusion here?

[Deleted]

If they pay her expenses than yes. Also, parents should raise their daughters better in the first place, so there's no need for them to get an abortion.

[ScoutRaven1]

There is still 9 months of pregnancy, which takes a toll on your body and effects your activities and actions until the child is born. There is also great financial cost to having a child, even if you are going to put it up for adoption.

I personally have never known any 16 year olds who were financially ready to birth a child. Any young women I knew who had kids, their parents basically had to pay for everything. That simply isn't fair to the parent.

The simple solution to the problem being don't get pregnant before you are ready. Obviously it doesn't always work out that way, but that still doesn't justify killing the child. Put it up for adoption or ask someone in your family to raise it, you'd be surprised.

[Antiganon]

The simple solution to the problem being don't get pregnant before you are ready. Obviously it doesn't always work out that way, but that still doesn't justify killing the child. Put it up for adoption or ask someone in your family to raise it, you'd be surprised.

Unless you have delivered already, there is no child to kill.

[Kathandira]

The simple solution to the problem being don't get pregnant before you are ready. Obviously it doesn't always work out that way, but that still doesn't justify killing the child. Put it up for adoption or ask someone in your family to raise it, you'd be surprised.

I'm not going to attempt to convince you that aborting a fetus is not the same as killing a child. But the same applies to those who won't convince someone the opposite. If a person feels abortion is their best option, that should be respected.

[Exeris]

I'm not going to attempt to convince you that aborting a fetus is not the same as killing a child. But the same applies to those who won't convince someone the opposite. If a person feels abortion is their best option, that should be respected.

It's kinda pointless anyway, humans will never all agree when a fetus turns into something worth saving.

[Katchii]

HIPAA applies to your spouse as well, unless you sign a consent form. When my wife's doctor calls, they will not give me any information other than "We are trying to reach so and so, please have her give us a call" unless she has filled out consent forms in their offices.

This is annoying, because she wants me to have that information, but the office doesn't give her the consent form until she specifically asks for it. Her GP and her OB have me on file, but the orthopedic she went to that one time for a broken arm does not, nor the neurologist she saw for migraines that one time, etc.

4th amendment applies because looking through somebody's medical records, without their consent, unless you are a medical provider and the information is material to you providing care, constitutes an unreasonable search.

Fair point about HIPAA, I had forgotten that the limitation applies to each individual patient regardless of relationship.

That said, I only ever said the father should be consulted, but not forcefully so. If done with consent, the mother would be willingly sharing that information so it wouldn't be considered unreasonable. If she doesn't want to share it, then it would be considered unreasonable.

[Antiganon]

It's kinda pointless anyway, humans will never all agree when a fetus turns into something worth saving.

Maybe drop the emotional argument?

Most people are against abortion after the point where the fetus could survive on its own, with medical assistance. As medicine improves, that point will get earlier and earlier.

I expect to see, in my life time, test tube babies gestated in 3D-printed artificial wombs. Once we reach that point, abortion in the conventional sense is no longer necessary, you would just transfer the fetus from the mother to the artificial womb, and the mother would sign documents waiving parental rights.

[Nfinitii]

You have two options:

1) Raise your daughter to share your beliefs on abortion.
2) Raise your daughter to think critically about sex and be educated about how to engage in it safely if she chooses to do so.

You do not have an option where you get to override her bodily autonomy.

That's the plan, but as anyone should know things don't always work out the way u want. Idk how her bodily autonomy has anything to do w/ someone else's life and bodily autonomy. I'd rather teach my children to take responsibility for their actions than to kill their baby.

[Hilhen7]

That's the plan, but as anyone should know things don't always work out the way u want. Idk how her bodily autonomy has anything to do w/ someone else's life and bodily autonomy. I'd rather teach my children to take responsibility for their actions than to kill their baby.

You can teach her whatever you want, that doesn't mean she will follow your teachings. It's her decision at the end of the day.

[Antiganon]

That's the plan, but as anyone should know things don't always work out the way u want. Idk how her bodily autonomy has anything to do w/ someone else's life and bodily autonomy. I'd rather teach my children to take responsibility for their actions than to kill their baby.

If she hasn't given birth, she isn't killing a baby.

Having an abortion when you are unable to financially, emotionally, or mentally provide a good life for a child is taking responsibility IMO. The alternative is for there to be yet one more unwanted baby in the world, yet one more child in an overburdened foster care system, etc. That is foisting your responsibility off onto the state.

The alternative being you force her to carry the baby to term AND raise the child as an active participant. That goes well for nobody.

[Exeris]

Maybe drop the emotional argument?

Most people are against abortion after the point where the fetus could survive on its own, with medical assistance. As medicine improves, that point will get earlier and earlier.

I expect to see, in my life time, test tube babies gestated in 3D-printed artificial wombs. Once we reach that point, abortion in the conventional sense is no longer necessary, you would just transfer the fetus from the mother to the artificial womb, and the mother would sign documents waiving parental rights.

I said nothing about most people, I said all. We need to pick or battles or waste our time and I'm pretty sure that one I quoted would have wasted his or her time.

[Martymark]

Should preteen girls be required to notify their parents if they get an abortion?

[Antiganon]

Should preteen girls be required to notify their parents if they get an abortion?

Below the age of consent? No, but the provider should be legally required to notify the parents AND social services. Ideally while the girl is in their office.

Ideally social services first, so they can be on-site before the parents get there and cause a shitstorm.

[Deleted]

Except I am not talking about any decisions here. I am talking strictly NOTIFICATION. Shouldnt a parent be notified when a medical procedure is performed on their child? Especially for future reference when a doctor asks the parent if the child has had any prior medical issues, type questions.

You literally said "how is it any different than any other medical procedure which requireas parental CONSENT" which means the parents need to agree

Yes you also mentioned notifications but you also likened it to parents agreement, which is the bit inreplied to

[petej0]

You literally said "how is it any different than any other medical procedure which requireas parental CONSENT" which means the parents need to agree

Yes you also mentioned notifications but you also likened it to parents agreement, which is the bit inreplied to

Maybe you missed my argument. I said

I understand "her body, her choice", consent aside, how is this different than any other medical procedure that requires parents consent?

I am not saying parents must consent, I am just asking how is this situation any different than any other medical procedure which requires parental consent? There is a reason Doctors must get consent on medical procedures. If you want to throw that aside for instances of abortion, I am ok with that, however parents should be notified for future reference or even if to look out for complications that may arise from a procedure or medicine taken.

[Shadowferal]

Teens aren't going to ever get "required" to do anything. Legislation is always focused on adults in these cases. And that means the doctors performing abortions will be the target.

[Halyon]

No. It's a very private matter, and there's already a lot of stigma around the subject in many places, demanding this sort of crap in an already stressed situation will just compound it further and can potentially result in the girl being forced to take a choice she doesn't want to. And being forced to have a baby is heinous.

[Shadowferal]

If she can't talk to her parents then she already has problems.

[Venant]

We gave you the moral arguments first - that the woman's (teenage girl in this case) bodily autonomy trumps all, so the abortion can't require consent of anyone else. We gave you the argument against parental notification, that the girl would no longer have true autonomy in a situation where the parents are required to be informed ahead of time, and that she may face undue punishment in a post-hoc notification scenario.

You responded by saying unironically that our positions meant we must be supportive of the rights of 12 year old girls to prostitute themselves, or we were internally inconsistent and arguing in bad faith.

Tell me, who is arguing from a foregone conclusion here?

What is the argument for bodily autonomy trumping 'all'? I believe that the observation that this belief means you must also support prostitution is true, since prostitution would be just another example of exercising bodily autonomy. I didn't see any arguments against this, only people saying 'well its illegal', which isn't an argument.

If you make 'bodily autonomy trumps all' a foundational principle, then you will end up with situations like 10 year old prostitutes, because bodily autonomy will trump *any* argument you can make against 10 year olds choosing to engage in prostitution. An extreme example is cited here because it forces you to admit that you don't really believe 'bodily autonomy trumps all', you only invoke that when it is convenient.