I feel I need to be informed about ANY medical procedure my child is undergoing. I DO feel like what she does with her pregnancy/child should be her ultimate decision. But as far as me not having knowledge about it, absolutely unacceptable.
Quoting Kayla [:)]♥:" Would you allow your 10 year old daughter have an abortion if she wanted one? What about a 15 year old?"
This isn't about the act of abortion. It's about making decisions FOR a CHILD without consulting their parents.
Yes. I would encourage it for a ten year old and talk more details to a fifteen year old...but your question is irrelevant.
Quoting nursemaya (12weeks):" <blockquote><b>Quoting ~Julie Blue Eyes~:</b>" The reasons for medical consent are ... [snip!] ... give surgical consent once they are pregnant. It is legal and right that a pregnant minor to make those decisions for herself."
I know about the case in Mexico. She couldn't have an abortion because abortion, itself, is illegal. That's different than a CHILD consenting to a procedure that they do not understand, without the support of parental involvement.
Of course I believe she SHOULD have had an abortion, as a pregnancy and child, for a child of 10, would or could be something far more traumatic than the abortion, itself.
THAT IS NOT WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT! :?
Quoting Kayla [:)]♥:" It isn't. Just trying to see if your "morals" would make you force your kid to carry a baby they didn't ... [snip!] ... an abortion at 16, or even 10, my mother would have never given me consent. It happens more often than you'd like to think. :?"
This isn't about "morals" or personal belief systems.
It's about allowing a CHILD to make their own medical decisions. Abortion is HUGE and to be so flippantly giving a thumbs up to non parental consent abortions for a young child is crazy, I think.
Quoting ~Julie Blue Eyes~:" I'm not naive about that. I know it happens, but 19% of abortions performed are on 15-19 year olds. ... [snip!] ... This debate isn't about the act of abortion, alone. It is about consent/non consent. One has nothing to do with the other."
you really are all over the place. Why are you even discussing age.. since you've already said you think a 16 year old should have consent as well. Mandating consent... means they are giving the parents the right to force a child to have a child. It's as simple as that. If you want to discuss right to information.. that's a different issue. you go from not wanting to allow 10 year olds to have an abortion, to insisting it shouldn't be a law because 10 year olds just don't have them. Really... what it comes down to.. is you want complete control of your child for all procedures until what.. age 18 I'm assuming? nothing you say will convince me that a parent should be able to force their child to have a baby.. and that is exactly what requiring consent does.
Quoting ~Julie Blue Eyes~:" The reasons for medical consent are the same, though. There are risks, there are dangers and I don't ... [snip!] ... completely lost sight of anything sensical. I cannot take you seriously or consider your opinion worthy of any contemplation."
I think YOU are horrid... and cannot take you seriously either... because your position forces children on CHILDREN.
Quoting Emmiboo:" I would be appalled if my 10 year old daughter were given an abortion without my consent.... and no that ... [snip!] ... ok with the decision being made without me is if she were dying on the operating table and needed something doing right then."
the sad thing is though.... that we're arguing this based on us being the parents we want to be. We have to think about the mass public. We'd all like to live in a perfect world where no one would force a child to have a child.
but.. that isn't the case, and we need to protect those children who are less fortunate. If my child was raped, and needed an abortion.. I'd sign. but.. if I had been raped at age 10, needed an abortion, I GUARANTEE you my mother would not have signed. nor would most of the bible thumping people at the church I grew up in. THey believed NO MATTER what, a life is a life and you don't murder it. So... I would have been forced to carry the child because it must have been in "God's bigger plan"... then I'd be forced to also go through the emotional trauma of giving the child up for adoption... pending both baby and I survived the pregnancy and delivery.
that is what the law protects. We all hope not to be in that place... and some are arguing based on knowing what kind of parent THEY would be. That's fantastic. Hopefully the law would never be an issue for us. I know I make it clear to my kids they can trust me with ANYTHING. but.. sadly.. not all children have that security.
Quoting ~Julie Blue Eyes~:" This isn't about the act of abortion. It's about making decisions FOR a CHILD without consulting their ... [snip!] ... Yes. I would encourage it for a ten year old and talk more details to a fifteen year old...but your question is irrelevant."
how is it irrelevant? it's completely relevant.
Quoting ~Julie Blue Eyes~:" I know about the case in Mexico. She couldn't have an abortion because abortion, itself, is illegal. ... [snip!] ... of 10, would or could be something far more traumatic than the abortion, itself. THAT IS NOT WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT! :?"
are you COMPLTELY stupid!!???? it is EXACTLY what we are talking about! I don't know why I keep arguing with you.... you absolutely refuse to even consider the other side of this.. which is what a debate is about.
without consent.... someone will be forced to have a baby. Neither government NOR parents should have the right to force someone to have a baby.
Quoting ♥ in
Quoting Lady GooGoo
I wonder though, all debate of abortion aside- what if the pregnancy is from rape/incest? Let's say, the child is raped by a family member, or whomever else, and the girl ends up pregnant and therefore, aborts. Do they check to see HOW the pregnancy even happened? Do they test to make sure he/she isn't related to the mother? I wonder how many men have gotten off of rape/incest/child molestation charges scott free because there was no proof of them ever committing a crime because an abortion was performed on the conceived, no questions asked?
I understand where both sides are coming from.
I understand there are cases of rape, incest, extreme religion, and down right negligent parents. And this is why they can have the abortion with parental consent.
But I think not having to notify the guardian/parent is wrong. As a parent I need to know when my child is being operated on, period. I do not see how some of you would be okay with your little girl, yes even 16, having an abortion and never knowing about it. As parents we need to know about it. There are definite health risks and even worse emotional consequences. God forbid she has complications and is too scared to tell you she had it done. Or if she is having a hard emotional time and is too scared to talk about it.
As parents is it our duty to guide and protect our children.
I do not have the right to make a child carry a baby but as a parent my child should never be operated on without my knowledge.
<blockquote><b>Quoting snglemama:</b>" the sad thing is though.... that we're arguing this based on us being the parents we want to be. We ... [snip!] ... for us. I know I make it clear to my kids they can trust me with ANYTHING. but.. sadly.. not all children have that security."</blockquote>
<blockquote><b>Quoting ~*~Modern*Day*Delilah~*~:</b>" I wonder though, all debate of abortion aside- what if the pregnancy is from rape/incest? Let's say, ... [snip!] ... there was no proof of them ever committing a crime because an abortion was performed on the conceived, no questions asked? "</blockquote>
So you wonder how many men have gotten away with incest/rape because these females have decided to abort leaving no proof and how terrible that is? Yes because the alternative to that would be.... forcing the victim to carry a pregnancy and bring a life into the world solely to provide proof, ah yes what a wonderful idea!