NVR Logo
Vote no on Proposition 4
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Save and Share Share
For the third time in three years, California voters are being asked to intervene in the dialogue between parents and juveniles regarding access to abortions.

For the third time in three years, Californians should reject a ballot measure requiring doctors to notify parents when minors seek an abortion.
Proposition 4 would amend the state Constitution to bar abortions for unemancipated minors until at least two days after a physician notifies the minors’ parent or legal guardian.

The law has other notification provisions if the minor is in the court protective system, and allows judges to bypass the notification requirement upon clear and convincing evidence of the minor’s best interests or maturity.
The measure grants doctors an exception to the law in the case of medical emergency, and allows doctors to notify family members other than the parent or guardian if there is reason to believe the teen has been or could be subject to family violence or abuse.

It also penalizes doctors who fail to comply with the notification provisions and mandates that the state track abortions among minors.
The ballot arguments on this measure could not be more polarizing. Both sides use hyperbole and scare tactics to persuade voters that they must do their part to protect teens from health risks, secrecy and poor decision-making.

But it is beyond the power of voters to force a family to be functional.

Voters cannot legislate, via the ballot box, trusting ties between parents and teens. Voters cannot ensure parents and teens are talking about the issues and making decisions together, or even that parents will act responsibly and in the best interests of their children at all times.

The responsibilities regarding these intensely personal and wrenching decisions fall to the parents and the teens themselves.

In a society divided about when and whether abortions are appropriate, a law such as Proposition 4 only adds responsibilities and pressure on young women and their families when they are most vulnerable and the situation most volatile. That serves no one.

We urge a no vote on Proposition 4.
20 comment(s)

pharper wrote on Sep 24, 2008 8:32 AM:

" Will they ever learn? It's been rejected twice--it's going to be rejected again. "

mikeb wrote on Sep 24, 2008 8:35 AM:

" Unless you pass a measure making the abortion providers liable for any and all complications that may occur as a result of the abortion I'll be voting in favor of this and any similar measures. If the parents are responsible for the consequences of the proceedure, they deserve notification ahead of the proceedure occuring. "

glenroy wrote on Sep 24, 2008 10:56 AM:

" This is a tough one…. there are serious long term emotional scares for a large percentage of those who receive abortions at an early age……..many with tragic consequences....


Avoiding the need for an abortion is really the only solution to this dilemma…. "

freeport56 wrote on Sep 24, 2008 11:00 AM:

" "dialogue between parents and juveniles regarding access to abortions."

Ther opening sentence says it all. It SHOULD be a dialog between parents and their children. I am not sure any 12 or 13 year old has enough maturity to deal with the scars this can create. besides what does it say about the relationship between parents and children.

This measure does not ban the childs abortion rights, it creates communication between parents and children. The way it should be in a family. destroy the communication, destroy the family.

It is irresponsible of the NVR to promote the destruction of the family unit.


VOTE YES ON PROP4! Preserve the family's ability to communicate and be honest with one another. "

cab e-girl wrote on Sep 24, 2008 11:28 AM:

" How can you criticize parents to be responsible for their minor children if you undermine their ability to parent? There are safeguards in this bill to protect children that are being abused by their parents and medical emergencies. As a concerned responsible parent, my vote will be YES. "

Diane Lily wrote on Sep 24, 2008 12:00 PM:

" All laws regarding minors making contracts for services or debt require parental consent. It is only abortion for which the business is wide open. This leaves a young girl vulnerable to the sexual predations of adult males. Over 50% of minors who are pregnant have been sexually molested by adult males.
Though abortion clinics and the medical profession in general are mandated reporters for suspected sexual abuse of minors abortion clinics cosider their net profit first and the safety of the minor, never.
This must stop. Parents don't raise their daughters so that they can be given as virtual concubines to dirty old men. Protect minor girls from sexual predators.
Vote YES on 4 "

pharper wrote on Sep 24, 2008 3:43 PM:

" Yes, Diane, and typically those males are those they know. How does a girl tell her father that she is pregnant with his child? I'm sure it's very nice to live in a world where all families will lovingly help their child make the right decision, but the rest of us don't live there. Where we live, there are a TON of families where a girl could get disowned, beaten, abused, or otherwise harmed for telling her parents she is getting an abortion. This has already been defeated twice before. Do we really need to trot it out again?

Freeport, one of the arguments I keep seeing is that the state is trying to take away a parent's right to parent their child. Mandating communication, as you've suggested this proposition will do, sounds a lot like government parenting to me. Face it: in some families, that's just not a possibility. Where is the protection for those girls? We can say, "Oh, of course there will be exceptions," but I find that hard to believe. What girls in that position would actually tell the truth to someone she doesn't know?

This proposition is dangerous for teenage girls. "

merri wrote on Sep 24, 2008 4:32 PM:

" raise your kids right. know who they are with and be resposible. My daughter had an abortion last year. I walked her into the clinic after we made the choice together. But I would have been O.K. with it if she did it herself. I trust her, we are open and I agreed with her wants even over my own thoughts. And please don't go blasting me for my or my family's life. I comment on this because it worked for us. Make up your own mind about what you and you family needs. Just don't be preachy to other people. "

sigep739 wrote on Sep 24, 2008 5:12 PM:

" Does anyone else think it is ironic that planned parenthood doesnt provide post-abortion counseling? I dont know anyone who has had an abortion who is 'ok' with it. Perhaps they should direct individuals to those who can help...

But wait... that would require them to admit that abortions could potentially be traumatizing. "

pharper wrote on Sep 24, 2008 7:15 PM:

" No one denies that abortions can be traumatizing...if you've met someone who claims they aren't, then that person is severely misinformed, and not in any way affiliated with Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood is very good about warning people of the risks and possible psychological effects after the fact. Of course an abortion can be traumatizing; the nature of the thing is very painful for some people--no one takes it lightly. However, depression is often seen after major surgeries and the like; it is not uncommon after big medical procedures. Admittedly, abortion is more traumatizing than a regular surgery, but the fact remains. No one denies that. "

napadad wrote on Sep 24, 2008 8:54 PM:

" dianne lily wrote "Though abortion clinics and the medical profession in general are mandated reporters for suspected sexual abuse of minors abortion clinics cosider their net profit first and the safety of the minor, never. "That is so off base its not funny! most of these kids come in with no insurance and no money, many times impregnated by the very people the bill would have the clinic informing.
And there is a great effort to stop any suspected abuse and you do these people a disservice by saying otherwise! Family planning is staffed with caring dedicated individuals who make every effort to see the women who come there get all the help they need and at a much lower pay scale than at a private practice. "

winemd wrote on Sep 24, 2008 9:10 PM:

" How many teens are actually pregnant by their fathers and that is the reason they don't want to tell them? It is probably way more likely that teens are trying to avoid talking to their parents because they are afraid that they will be in trouble with their parents (just like they might not tell them that they were in jail for drinking if they could get away with it). I think the point that Diane is trying to make is that the potential father (not the girl's father) can try to pressure the girl into an abortion, which can make the situation worse and put the girl in a difficult position with the male and give him more power over her. There are "boyfriends" who will beat her if she doesn't have an abortion and in these cases, a family can help. Yes, obviously the girls know the males, but most of the time it is not the father. I disagree with the assumption that most or even many teenaged girls will be disowned, beaten, etc. Most parents will not be thrilled, but they love their child and will do the best they can in a tough situation. This is a time when they need the people who love them.
Also, the statement "What girls in that position would actually tell the truth to someone she doesn't know?" Isn't that exactly what they ARE doing if they walk into a clinic? They are telling the truth to someone they don't know and who doesn't know or care about them (except in an abstract sense).
I have to consent to every other medical procedure for my child; why shouldn't I be informed about this? "

funnyme wrote on Sep 24, 2008 10:15 PM:

" Bull.
Vote YES. "

Diane Lily wrote on Sep 25, 2008 10:35 AM:

" PHarper apparently agrees that the majority of minor girls who become pregnant are so as the result of abuse by adult males.
But the girl should not have to be the one to report on her father and Prop 4 will see to that. Any decent doctor would suspect something seriously wrong when a 12, 13 or 15 year old shows up pregnant. The doctor and the clinic personnel are the mandated reporters not the girl.
And, there is a California Bay area case of a 13 year old continually abused by her mother's boyfriend. He took her to a clinic and threatened her if she told her mother. The mother finally discovered what was happening and reported the abuser to the police. He is now behind b ars. But the parents shouldn't have to wait while abuse continues before protecting their daughter. Prop 4 will protect the daughter and provide the parent with his/her rightful authority "

DinoSilver wrote on Sep 25, 2008 6:38 PM:

" "Voters cannot legislate, via the ballot box, trusting ties between parents and teens. Voters cannot ensure parents and teens are talking about the issues and making decisions together, or even that parents will act responsibly and in the best interests of their children at all times." You got to be kidding me on this arguement!!! Parents are responsible if their children use drugs, drink alcohol, use weapons, don't go to school.... Parents are not allowed to leave their children unattended in their home, their car..... (I'm talking older children here, not younger children and babies). We have to approve medications, sign consent for surgical procedures, sign waivers for sports, and co-sign financial obligations.

By not mandating parental notification, we are protecting the man/boy who impregnated the girl, not the girl.

By not voting for Prop 4 (and by this articles own arguement) we are saying that abortion clinics have the bigger burden of responsibility if there is endangerment to the girl than the parent has. Or the burden of the minor boy's parents (as many the case may be).

If you are pro-choice or pro-life, when will we as a society, understand that by not addressing the root cause of why the minor girl got pregnant, we will never reduce the amount of abortions in this state.

Abortions to minors on demand does not "protect our children". It enables the wrong that put the girl in this position. That includes adult thugs and predators. "

a teacher wrote on Oct 24, 2008 6:47 AM:

" In a country where you have to be 18 to get a tatoo and schools need permission to give an aspirin, how can anyone argue that minor children have the ability to decide on an abortion?

I support a woman's right to choose, but not a child's right. I voted yes. "

srnitnw wrote on Oct 24, 2008 11:36 AM:

" I cannot understand how a child does not have the right to choose whther or not they are ready to be a parent, a decision that will affect them the rest of there lives well beyond adulthood. I am sorry, but I just can't wrap my mind around that one. One might ask, at what point is a female considered a woman". I would argue that menstruation and pregnancy are valid points of reference - not age. "

a teacher wrote on Oct 26, 2008 9:15 PM:

" A 12 year old is capable of driving a car. Should it therefore be legal for them to do so? There are many things that children are capable of doing that e prohibit them from doing and mostly for good reason. How is it that a child is suddenly capable of making a life changing decision such as being a parent? Why do you assume that the parents would consul keeping the child or abortion? Why assume that the child wants an abortion? Parents have the ultimate legal authority over their children in all other circumstances. What makes this different? "

jeepracer10 wrote on Oct 28, 2008 12:57 PM:

" So how about we dont tell parents about thier kids grades, dont make the parents go to traffic court, and dont notify parents when kids are arrested. "

cop105 wrote on Nov 3, 2008 10:18 AM:

" So if our teens get pregnant, we should not worry because the state will take care fo them. So why even try to raise kids when the government says it wants to come in between you and your kids. All of you are voting down this measure because you say it will never happen to your kids. I have yet to find a parent of a 16 yearold daughter who would not want to be notified if she was to get an abortion. What if she was raped? But I guess you can leave it up to the government to decide what is best for your kids. "

Comment Guidelines
The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.
What gets your comment posted?
• Staying on topic
• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less
• Avoiding name-calling
• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger
What gets your comment deleted?
• Personal attacks
• Derogatory remarks
• Name-calling of any sort
• Going off-topic
• Hate speech
• Racially-insensitive comments
• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict
• Posting e-mail addresses
• Posting comments of a commercial nature
• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS
• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.
The fine print
- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.
- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.
- Comments may take several hours to be posted.
- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.
- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.
- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.
Search:
Web Search Powered
By Yahoo! Search
Napa Valley Register on Facebook
Copyright © 2009 Napa Valley Publishing, a member of Lee Enterprises, Inc.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy