• printer friendly
• mail this article
• iPod format
• digg

Photo

Proposition 85, which would require parental notification at least 48 hours before a physician performs an abortion on a minor, is on the ballot for the Nov. 7 elections, after a similar proposition was narrowly rejected last year.

Proposition 85 is very similar to last year’s Proposition 73, which was rejected by a 50.8 to 49.2 percent margin.

Katie Short, co-author of the Proposition 85 initiative, said there were a few changes made to this year’s proposition, such as subduing the language. While Proposition 73 refers to abortion as a procedure to cause the “death of an unborn child,” Proposition 85 defines abortion as “termination of a pregnancy” that does not result in birth.

Paul Laubacher, an intensive-care nurse in Sacramento and proponent of the proposition, said it would give flexibility to parents who want notice before a surgical procedure is performed on their underage daughter.

“(Parents) spend years looking after their (children’s) welfare, taking them to soccer games, and to have this surgery done without them knowing is a serious lapse in health-care policy,” Laubacher said.

But opponents of the proposition say they believe requiring parental notification would place the most vulnerable teens in danger.

Jessica Langtry, a supporter of the No on 85 campaign, said this proposition would force teens from abusive homes to delay receiving critical medical care, or turn to illegal or self-inflicted abortions because they cannot go to their parents.

Langtry added that she believes the proposition is somewhat unnecessary because many teens choose to inform their parents anyway.

“Parents rightfully want to be involved and most teens, around 70 percent, are already involving at least one parent in these decisions,” she said. “We’re definitely in favor of parent-teen communication, but we just don’t feel that the government can mandate that sort of communication.”

Langtry said the California teen-pregnancy rate has fallen substantially over the past 10 years and attributed this drop to programs that promote comprehensive sex education and communication between parents and teens.

“California is leading the nation in the reduction of pregnancy rates, which is why we question the need for a proposition,” she said.

The proposition would give parents the choice to waive their rights to notification and does not require parental consent.

“On all surgical procedures on minors, parental consents are required,” Laubacher said. “Proposition 85 is only requiring parental notification (in the case of abortion), not consent.”

The proposition would also allow minors to petition against notifying their parent or guardian.

But Langtry said she believes the distinction to be minimal in the mind of a scared and pregnant teen.

“For a teen who comes from an abusive home, having to tell her parents is what she fears, whether or not they agree with her decision,” she said.

Langtry emphasized the difficulty teens might have navigating an overburdened court system.

“She’s scared; she’s desperate, and she doesn’t need a judge,” Langtry said. “She needs to get herself to a counselor or medical care.”

Langtry said she and other opponents of the proposition believe its supporters have a larger agenda to ban abortion itself and this proposition is the first step toward reaching that goal.

But Laubacher pointed out that the proposition affects notification of abortion, not abortion rights themselves.

“Sometimes you hear the claim that this is another initiative to chip away at abortion,” he said. “However, if one looks at the last clause of the initiative text, it points out that this initiative is speaking only to the requirement of notification and does not pertain to any other rights to abortion.” Short said she feels confident about this election since Proposition 73 was closer to being accepted than any other proposition last year.