My opinion of this state question may surprise you; I plan to vote against it.
If we accept the case for abortion being legal to begin with, then I see no reason to treat a teen pregnancy any different from an adult pregnancy. If the right to control of one's body is so powerful that it trumps the fetal right to live, then it very obviously also trumps the parents' interest in the body of their child.
Some possible counterarguments that I find compelling enough to mention here but not compelling enough to change this counterintuitive vote of mine:
As a point of information, what other things in life is it illegal for a minor to do without her parents' consent? What things in life is it illegal for a minor to do but legal for an adult to do? It does seem strange that someone be allowed to have an abortion without asking her parents, yet legally required to ask her parents before (say) calling a 1-900 number or watching an R-rated movie.
Is it legal to perform an appendectomy on a teenager without notifying her parents? If not, then how did abortion come to be treated uniquely?
And of course, if you believe what I believe about life origins (more important than my believing it alone is that I think it's far more prudent to take it as true, given the comparative consequences of being wrong either way), then the issue of parental notification before an abortion involves not one, but two distinct parent-child situations.
Posted by Matt Bruce at October 31, 2005 10:36 AM