The House voted to make pregnant teenagers' lives a living hell today.
And hell's ambassador, our beloved president, welcomed them:
In a statement, President Bush praised the House for passing the measure. ''The parents of pregnant minors can provide counsel, guidance, and support to their children and should be involved in these decisions," he said. ''I urge the Senate to pass this important legislation and help continue to build a culture of life in America."
As the parent of a teenager, do I hope that if my daughter were to become pregnant, she would come to me and seek my guidance? Of course. But I'm also betting that my willingness to discuss sexuality and birth control with her means that, when the time comes for her to make those decisions, she'll have been using contraceptives in the first place.
As progressives, I realize this is not an easy topic for us. A scared 15-year old couple, facing pregnancy, needs some guidance. And we all hope against hope that we will have built enough of a trusting relationship with our kids that they will involve us in any decisions that have to be made.
But believing that every family is like that is pure fairy-dust snorted fantasy. Let's face it: We've got a huge movement across this country to teach teenagers that sex is evil, nasty, and something that shouldn't even be thought of until you're married. And we also know that abstinence programs don't work. On average, teens exposed to "abstinence-only" programs put off sex for one year, and when they do engage in it, they're not using contraceptives.
I live in New York state, which does not have a parental notification law. I'm glad. But the House of Representatives, led by a Florida representative, passed legislation yesterday. Here is the rep's comment:
"This legislation will close a loophole that allows adults not only to help minors break state laws by obtaining an abortion without parental consent, but also contributes to ending the life of an innocent child," said the chief sponsor, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.).
Let's parse that, shall we? There's no expression of concern for young women faced with making a monumental decision in that statement anywhere, is there? The first part is about punishing the adult that a minor asks to help her terminate her pregnancy, the second is the concern for the fetus that's being carried. Where the FUCK is the concern for the pregnant teenager?
I think the subtext for that statement is this: "Stupid sluts who get pregnant should not expect some grownup to bail them out. They have to live with the consequences of their actions and bring that baby into the world. Of course, should stupid slut need state assistance to raise that child, she's on her own."
For more information on pregnant teenagers and consent laws, go here:Planned Parenthood.
Here are some of the highlights:
* The CCPA potentially requires a minor to satisfy differing legal requirements in two states: the state she comes from and the state where she is to have the abortion. If those two states both have parental consent or notice requirements, the minor may have to seek waivers from judges in two states, further delaying her abortion and raising its costs and health risks.
* Because 87% of U.S. counties lack an abortion provider (Finer & Henshaw, 2003), CCPA will increase the burdens on the many young women who must cross state lines simply to access the nearest abortion provider.
∑ The CCPA also raises a number of other constitutional and legal questions, particularly those related to issues of federalism. The legislation effectively nullifies the laws of those states that allow physicians to provide confidential services to minors who enter the states for abortion and deprives individuals of their right to cross state lines to obtain lawful services. Such intervention by the federal government would be unprecedented, and raises serious implications for states, and individuals' rights (Saul, 1998).
What then must be done?
Tell your Senators that this bill cannot get past them. Bush will sign it; it will become law of the land. The last hope is the Senate. Please check out the language of S.396 and urge your senator to vote NO. Young women's lives are at stake.
Update [2005-4-28 17:22:50 by lorraine]:I called Schumer and Clinton's offices, told them I strongly opposed S.396, asked them to vote "no." I also called my local Planned Parenthood office and asked if there was anything else I could do to oppose this bill getting to the president's desk. The public affairs person I spoke to asked me to check SaveRoe for updates. I'm passing this along to you.
I'm deeply gratified by the response, even if we have disagreements about how to respond to parental notification laws. (And I appreciate the effort that went into dealing with those who seemed hellbent on distracting us.) Please don't let this issue die.
I will continue to do research on this issue, and when I have concrete actions that we can take to further oppose this matter, I'll let you know.
Thank you. My daughters thank you.