There are things that certain parents are better off not
knowing. While ideally, familial communication would be entirely
open, understanding and non-judgmental, we all know reality is far
from ideal. However, Proposition 73, set to appear on the special
election ballot for November, lacks this understanding of
reality.
This proposition, if passed, would require women 17 years old
and younger to procure parental permission before being able to
acquire an abortion. Given the titles “Parents’ Right
to Know” and “Child Protection” initiative, this
proposition sounds promising and well-intended.
On the surface it is meant to increase parent-child
communication and keep children from making the wrong decisions.
But if you take a closer look, you’ll realize the inherent
dangers in this proposition.
Firstly, this proposition will simply not work. Forty-three
states have similar consent laws, and it has been shown that they
have no positive effect; teens in these states are no more likely
to talk to their parents out of fear of physical and/or emotional
abuse as well as eviction from their homes.
While similar consent laws have ways for teens to appeal to
other adults (such as judges), according to the American Academy of
Pediatrics, forcing pregnant teens to apply to such authority
figures has adverse effects on their physical and emotional
health.
There is no real way to enforce familial communication; it
simply isn’t realistic. Children will talk to their parents
if they have a good relationship with them, not because the law
requires it. It would be better for all parties if a young woman
was simply allowed to get an abortion, which is already an
emotionally detrimental experience, and not have to stress about
the reactions of her parents or other authority figures.
Furthermore, as Proposition 73 is currently worded, a young
woman can acquire an abortion without the permission of parents if
a physician certifies that there is a danger to the mother’s
health, if a judge finds that either she is sufficiently mature and
well-informed, or if informing her parents is not in her best
interest.
However, if this is a case of rape or incest, it may not be in
the best interest of the young woman to reveal her story to
complete strangers.
Rape is an extremely complicated issue; rape survivors and
courts do not always have the best relationship. While it may seem
that more instances of incest and rape will be revealed, a trial
prosecuting the accused rapist will likely ensue.
In most cases this does not lead to a conviction and will
instead simply result in emotional trauma for the young woman.
There are probably many other situations in which it will not be
in the young woman’s best interest to talk to any authority
figure about her situation. Confidentiality exists for this purpose
and there is no good reason to undermine it.
Furthermore, most young women don’t have the time to take
off of school and other activities to appear in court and make an
appeal of this kind. As I said before, supporters of Proposition 73
lack comprehension of reality.
Even if the proposition was feasible, rather than protect
children ““ as the title of the proposition suggests ““
it will only endanger their lives. Making abortion so difficult for
teens might result in an increased use of “back-alley”
techniques that would endanger the life of both the fetus and the
mother. Also, if parents refuse their daughter the right to an
abortion, they are, in fact, putting her at greater risk. The
maternal mortality rate of childbirth is 11 times that of
“safe” abortion (legal abortion techniques as opposed
to a coat hanger).
Lastly, but probably most important in the long run, Proposition
73 is a constitutional amendment. This means that while it will
only take a majority of the vote in November to pass, it would take
a two-thirds vote by the Legislature to have it removed.
This wouldn’t be a huge problem if it didn’t define
an unborn child as “a child conceived, but not yet
born” but, unfortunately, Proposition 73 is worded to become
a powerful anti-abortion tool.
If passed, Proposition 73 will do the exact opposite of what it
intends. It will harm the young women it targets and will do
nothing to increase familial communication. In the long run it will
further the anti-abortion clause and hamper women’s ability
to control their bodies.
The special election will occur in November of this year. If you
haven’t registered yet, or have moved recently, you need to
make sure to register (online or grab a form at the post office) at
least 15 days before the election. While you may think that this
proposition would never get passed in California, recent polls show
that public opinion is evenly divided. In other words, your vote
really counts this time, and you have a chance to make a
difference. Make your voice heard.
If you’re like Lara, and wish idealism were realism,
e-mail her at lloewenstein@media.ucla.edu.