On this past Friday the Alaska Supreme Court issued a decision overturning a state law allowing parents the right to agree to or deny abortions their minor teenager daughters may be considering. The state’s parental consent law has been tied up in court ever since the state legislature approved in in 1997. It is refreshing to hear that Alaska’s Supreme Court had the good intelligence to protect teenagers and allowing a path to their emancipation. In other words they would not be forced to carry a pregnancy and go through labor if they did not want to endure this process which may place their bodies in harm’s way.
The most important point here is that the rights of the individual outweigh the rights of other’s trying to impose their view on what that individual should or should not do with their body.
The court issued a 3-2 decision on the law stating that it denies a teenager her right to an abortion.
Both the majority and the two dissenting judges agree that parents should play a vital role in their children’s lives and health care decisions but the majority said parents should not have a veto power to override a teen’s decision to get an abortion.
Justices Walter Carpeneti and Warren Matthews issued dissents in the case and said the state legislature carefully balanced the right of parents and teenagers and said the measure “is the least restrictive alternative which will effectively advance the state’s compelling interests while protecting the child’s constitutional right.”
Information on providers who offer abortion care or the abortion pill can be found at a number of sites including Abortion.com and RU486.com. According to statistics from the state health department, there were 1,923 abortions in Alaska in 2006 and 126 were done on girls 17 or younger who would have been subject to the parental consent law.
The ruling is the second time the Alaska Supreme Court has weighed in on the parental consent law. In 2001, the justices ruled the measure invalid and cited the state’s privacy clause as the reason, despite any wording saying the clause was meant to uphold an unlimited right to abortion.
Hopefully, this can be seen as a positive step toward maintaining the right of an individual to choose privately the choices they make in their reproductive lives.
Abortion - Abortion Clinics, Abortion Pill, Abortion Information 
November 9, 2007 at 7:56 pm
Why would anyone in their right mind want to have an abortion, if you are old enough to open those legs of yours and have sex then your old enough to raise a child!!!!!!!!!!
LikeLike
November 11, 2007 at 4:35 pm
Missy,
Your comments seem to not address a large number of important issues. Firstly, I am curious, what your position is on the incredible number of women of many diverse ages who are in the terrible position of:
1) Having been raped.
2) Used contraception or have had definitive interventions like a tubal ligation that has failed – certainly they are responsible and that is no fault of theirs that their birth control failed.
3) Women that have a tubal pregnancy (it is still a live embryo or fetus). Are they allowed, in your opinion to have that life threatening living entity to be removed?
4) Sadly develop cancer of the cervix (just one example of the many illnesses which can occur during pregnancy) where the definitive cure may be a radical hysterectomy, thus saving the mother’s life, but ending that of the fetus. The alternative is that the mother will die from the cervical cancer and the baby will not have a mother, or that both baby and mother die in the process of not taking proper care of the cancer.
5) Have illnesses where the illness in pregnancy can threaten the life of the mother, anything from immunological diseases such as lupus to heart anomalies, there are thousands of examples etc.
Many more examples could be given. Would you want to deny these women the right to control what goes on in their body? Or is your dogmatic limitation on a women’s right restricted to the example you give in your comment?
Please help me understand your position with more clarity if you desire.
Regards,
Gail S.
LikeLike
November 14, 2007 at 1:01 am
Odd…people who advocate abortions WEREN’T aborted.
LikeLike
November 14, 2007 at 1:35 am
Missy:
I am curious. Are you saying that anyone who had or will have an abortion is not “in their right mind?” Are they all crazy? Thanks
LikeLike
November 14, 2007 at 1:36 am
Gail:
But I have to ask you – is not abortion killing?
Thanks
LikeLike
November 14, 2007 at 3:04 am
Thank you for your input.
If one looks at previous threads of this type of comment, one would ask, to initiate a grounded conversation, is there any situation that you would allow an abortion?
Previously, seemingly reasonable, that is to most the population of this country, and the vast majority of western civilizations – For the protection of the life of the mother seems like a reasonable context to allow abortion.
Examples include, and there are many more,
1) Cancer of the Cervix,
2) Tubal pregnancies,
3) The many diseases that the mother has a >50% mortality rate, ie Epstein’s heart anomaly,
4) Rape of a women without their (implied) consent,
5) Episodes when the best intentions, like a tubal ligation and a vasectomy are performed but they fail, sadly this happens, and there are many more examples. These are not insignificant examples, as one sees them commonly in everyday experience as reported in the peer reviewed literature, and anecdotal experience. This is a confluence of opinion by both sides of the issue.
So, as a starting point to understand perspectives, do any of these in your opinion, warrant allowing a women to have the right to make the choice about what she would do with her own body, or do you feel that under all these circumstances the women has no right to choose what happens to her body? This would be educational to the discussion. Thank you for your kind participation.
LikeLike
November 15, 2007 at 3:15 pm
Gail:
I”m not good at these blogs, so excuse me if i’m not posting in the correct order.
I am generally pro-choice and agree that in the circumstances you outlined, a woman should have an abortion. But I struggle with the other side of the coin which is that something, a fetus, a “baby”, an embryo, whatever, is being killed. Why can’t the pro-choice movement admit that? I mean, there is something alive and when they come out of the clinic, it is not alive. That is the big red elephant, or green elephant or whatever, in the middle of the room for the pro-choice movement. Thanks, Pat
LikeLike
November 15, 2007 at 3:18 pm
Jessica:
I agree with you that those who advocate for abortion rights were not aborted. I assume by your comments that you are pro-life.
As a pro-choice person with concerns about abortion, I do need to ask, however, if you support the use of birth control? Thanks, Pat
LikeLike
November 15, 2007 at 7:17 pm
Patrick,
Thank you for your note. I cannot speak for the pro-choice movement as you suggest. I do not know if there is anyone that can speak for the pro choice movement, as I do not believe it to be a formal organization with an elected spokesperson. So I think your question is a little difficult to answer to begin with.
But I will try from one simple person’s perspective.
1) If I have cancer, the cells are living and growing. I do want those cells killed.
2) If I had an embryonic tumor, a tumor made up of cells very similar to those of a baby, I do want those killed.
3) If I had a tubal pregnancy which is exactly the same as the embryo or fetus (we don’t need to be stuck on the nomenclature, except that it is medically accurate, unless you want to) then I do want that embryo killed as it might kill me. However, please note that there is a chance that it could grow into an abdominal pregnancy and live as a baby. As a women, I choose to not take that chance. That is what it is all about, my choice. No one may legislate away my ability to control what goes on in my body. It is a curiosity to me why so many people want to do that. In many western countries (European, or the Scandinavian countries for example) and non western (Russia for example) no one would consider to try and control your body.
4) If I were raped and were impregnated (by my father let’s say, sadly it does happen, and this is seen routinely in health care offices) I would want to kill that embryo and not have it grow to be born as a baby, the product of a father and daughter. I am using the word kill because you suggest it, even though it has many other connotations attached to it.
5) One must focus once again on the balance of liberties. Simply, one should not have the right to legislate what I can or cannot do with my body, as long as I am of sound mind.
Although I cannot speak for the Movement as a whole, as they are not an individual but a set of individuals with a similar perspective, but also many differences, on the issue of the liberty to control one’s own reproduction.
So, I do not think anyone as a spokesperson for a non defined group is not admitting anything. Although, I am certain there are people that have difficulty explaining themselves because they feel trapped by word choice that is given to box them in. Words have specific connotations that are different from a linguistical standpoint to every unique individual.
So Patrick, is the fact that one admits that we are killing in these circumstances change the point at all? Or is it just the word choice that bogs you down. Or is there a point you would make, given that one might admit that something is being killed. I would like to know why that is so important. Remember, kill, may have many different connotations to you than to me. As a word may be defined by a dictionary but lives as symbol in people’s brains as a result of a long history of experience.
Please expound, if you wish, specifically, on why admitting to kill as you suggest makes any difference in the larger picture of the privacy of one’s body. You sound intelligent, it is just hard to see where you are are trying to lead with this question.
I hope I have been able to articulate this clearly. I am happy to respond again if that does not make sense.
Regards,
Gail
LikeLike
November 16, 2007 at 2:48 am
Gail:
As a moderate pro choicer, I cringe when I see a debate and the pro-lifer says abortion is killing and we say “uh, no it isn’t.” The doctors know what is going on, especially in later term abortions. Women know. Everyone with some intelligence knows, but we avoid the issue and we lose our credibility. If some pro choice organization tomorrow admitted that abortion is a killing act, it would not make any headlines. There would be a bid “well,duh” out there. Also, why not make the point that there are sanctioned forms of killing, i.e., capital punishment, war, euthenasia, etc. That’s how I see abortion. Now, I would not suggest that Planned Parenthood put the wod on their stationary, but just be honest with the public, dont obfuscate, admit it and then there is no comeback.
The pro-choice movement needs to get more comfortable with the act of abortion. When they dont answer questions or mumble, it is clear they have some problems. Heck, half the time our spokespeople are even afraid to say the word “abortion.” Instead, they say “choice.” Well, “choice” can ultimately lead to abortion. And abortion is sad, but it can be the right choice. Thanks Pat
LikeLike
November 16, 2007 at 4:17 am
Patrick,
How is one moderate on the right of a women to control her own body? Either they can control it or not. Happy to hear a dissenting perspective. That is confusing to me. I am not sure who “we” is, but as you suggest everyone who has some knowledge knows what an abortion is.
It ultimately is a matter of the choice of a women to choose to have or not have done to her body what she wants.
Should Catholics (an example of a body of thought that does have a representative that can opine on position, unlike the prochoice movement which does not speak for all people that are pro choice) admit that they cannot take care of women properly?
We do not see that being mentioned.
They do not sanction birth control, a most basic item of availability and benefit.
The Catholic hospitals do not allow tubals, or other forms of birth control. Even for women that beg for it, after ending up at their hospitals because the ambulence dropped them off there because that hospital was the “closest.”
They do not allow the proper work up or treatment of many illnesses such as missed abortions (medical term) or tubal pregnancies (if we must go into detail we can, but it may be unnecessary for this thread, perhaps Miss Carvin can elaborate.)
As a final note, the psychological literature reveals facts that are quite to the contrary then that of what the pro life (another anomalous phrase) try to instill in our psyche. It is just wrong.
To the vast majority, an abortion, is a relief of a problem in one’s life plans, and most people are happy to have it finalized. Most are not sad, and do not suffer sad repercussions. Only a small portion are burdened by negative feelings and they typically tend to be the ones that are of a position of religiosity instilled guilt.
One who has worked closely in this community knows that most women do very well, and do not feel they have suffered a sad event (ie the abortion). What they feel is sad that they were victims of failed birth control, a rape, an ectopic, poor advice from a person of authority, or whatever mechanism caused them to become pregnant when they did not want to be.
Patrick, you may be biased by your gender, I won’t infer that since I do not know you and that would be unfair, however i would suggest some education. If you desire it, check out the extensive literature on the subject as it has been documented so we do not have to rely on anecdotal stories or hyperbole.
As a brief review, if you desire, please note:
1) Sexuality Counseling – by Estelle Weinstein
2) Psychological Aspects of Women’s Health Care – Donna E. Stewart, M.D.
3) Psychiatric Aspects of Abortion – Nada L. Stotland, M.D.
Perhaps these tomes will help set the facts straight for you.
These are all well experienced and respected individuals who have studied these issues for decades. They come from a wide variety of respected institutions and demographics. There are many more, with a vast confluence of opinion supporting this perspective.
We are fortunate to have such a large body of data, from many institutions, to support these opinions. More reading is available, but this space permits just a few examples.
Kind Regards,
Gail
LikeLike
November 17, 2007 at 9:22 pm
Gail:
I’m inpressed! Are you some kind of lobbyist or something?
I guess when I say I am a moderate on abortion, I mean, for example, that it truly bothers me that abortions can be performed at so late a date (e.g., 24 weeks). If the thing the woman is carrying is wanted, at that point they are calling it a “baby.” but if it not wanted, then we kind of avoid the issue.
But let me try to be clear. I support a woman’s right to terminate the pregnancy at that point. It’s just that I get weary watching the pro-choice movement do a tap dance on all the tough issues. For example, so called partial birth abortion. Remember a few years ago they were out there saying it was only performed in the most dire circumstance and that there were only a few hundred a year? Well, I believe they put that inaccurate info out there because they felt they almost had to “aplogize” for those abortions. Then, in 1997 the shit hit the fan when one of them came out and finally told the truth about the procedure.
I guess I am saying don’t apologize for abortion, don’t obfuscate, heck, use the word and dont’ be ashamed. When we cower, when we not reveal our true feelings and perhaps ambiguities, we look like fools.
Heck, maybe I am not such a moderate after all. Hmmmmmmmm
Pat
LikeLike
November 19, 2007 at 12:40 am
Pat,
I have been watching this thread and I apologize if I missed parts and am including my own ideas where there has already been conversation.
I do not know if Gail is a lobbyist, although i am curious after you brought that up . . . she sounds quite informed.
I felt I wanted to say something since you seemed reasonable. You sound like someone taking some sort of religious guilt on your shoulders. Let go.
Please do not be offended if you are (or are not). We are all humans and should be respected as such.
It is the choice for a women to choose what happens to her body. I must agree with Gail. No one is “in charge of Opinions” for Prochoicers. I certainly did not elect anyone to represent me on this issue. Although i do elect individuals to broadly represent me in the republic that we live in.
It is so important that we all (the several hundreds of millions of people that this effects) by the legislation of a few grey hair legislators that just do not seem to get it (or get pregnant for that matter!).
I may sound naive here. But forget the movement and think about the individual. It seems like you still don’t answer the question posed to you on every occasion. Gail has been too patient. It is not about word choice, or whatever happened in ’97 (what did happen, i don’t understand, sorry to sound dumb . . . a decade ago?), etc., it is all about what happens when an individual decides to exercise control over their own body. What is so hard to get or admit? People should be allowed, as long as they are mentally healthy, to control their own bodies. Thats the whole story . . .
I would fight very hard for you (and I do not know you or anything about you) for that right, for you.
This is one of the reasons i really appreciate abortion.com. That site seems to be there for people trying to find good information about abortion. No one is not admitting anything (I know that was a strange sentence), maybe know one is avoiding admitting anything? There is nothing
Whatever all the things you are talking about, which I just do not understand, mean, it just does not matter. It is about a person deciding what they do with their body. Forget about if you have guilt. You can have that with your body. Do not impose it on anyone else’s body! Do not vote for a person who will legislate against my right to control my body. I am not telling you what to do here actually. Vote for whoever you want.
But I beg you, tell all your friends and tell yourself, we have the rights to control our own bodies. That right should not be intruded upon. Gail sounds exhausted trying to get that simple point across. Sorry Gail if i misrepresent your thoughts, I’m trying to help.
Who is “they”? Who is “we”?
We are a diverse group of people. Catholics, Jews, Muslims, etc. Most often we want to be happy and healthy and be in control of what happens to us. Especially when the issue is as personal and important as this one is!
It almost sounds like a conspiracy theorist. There are too many women who do not want anyone fiddling with the control of their bodies. Let us decide on our own. Most of us are intelligent enough to do so!
I do not mean to be rude. Please do not hear it that way Pat.
I trust my doctor, she delivered my three babies. I don’t care what procedure she does to take care of me (I never heard of a partial birth abortion and when i looked it up in a friends medical textbook i could not find it!). I trust her (my doctor – and that is what is most important- our personal relationship!) to do what is best for me. If that procedure is yucky then i do not care. I want to be healthy, and alive to take care of my husband and three daughters that I have presently!
Thanks for listening,
Ella
LikeLike
November 19, 2007 at 8:55 pm
Hi, Ella. Thanks for chiming in.
I want to clarify that I TOTALLY support the right of a woman to have an abortion – or 10 for that matter. It is not for me to judge. If a woman had ten different reasons to have an abortion, that’s good enough for me.
I guess I’ve been approaching this conversation from the more political angle because that is my background. I have an extensive national political resume, wont go into the details and it has been frustrating for me to watch national pro-choice organizations stumble whenever the conversation (or debate more likely) turns to the “A” word. They keep saying “choice,” but they seem uncomfortable with abortion. And when I say “they,” I mean the National Abortion Rights Action League, Planned Parenthood, etc. Heck, a few years ago NARAL ran a commercial and not once used the “A” word.
So, I am with you and Gail. Totally. But this issues gets played up on the national political scene every day and I wish there was an organization (or a candidate) who could be forthright about the issue.
And I agree with you that this website is a wonderful source. I hope it is helpful to women out there.
Pat
LikeLike
June 26, 2008 at 3:30 am
MISSY? Have you ever been raped? did not think so…keep your opp for those who have not been raped…
LikeLike
June 26, 2008 at 3:34 am
also do not damn those who are rapped that is…
LikeLike
January 9, 2009 at 2:20 am
hi
tvyvofjx65jpoipq
good luck
LikeLike
January 10, 2009 at 3:43 pm
hi
tvyvofjx65jpoipq
good luck
LikeLike
December 25, 2009 at 12:08 am
Hello,
My name is Jack Steele.
Abortion pill information.
I provided the tip that led to the arrest and conviction of James Kopp, who shot three Canadian doctors before shooting and killing an American doctor. Kopp is an anti-abortion fanatic who targeted the doctors because they were performing abortions.
–Jack Steele
LikeLike