No Abortion Options Lead to...

The Cauldron's server is expensive and requires monthly payments. Please become a Bronze, Silver or Gold Donor if you can. Donations are needed every month. Without member support, we can't afford the server.

Or donate directly via Paypal

This message board is The Cauldron: A Pagan Forum's SMF Archive Board. It is closed to new memberships and to posting, but there are over 250,000 messages here that you can still search and read -- many full of interesting and useful information. (This board was open from February 2007 through June 2011).

Our new vBulletin discussion board is located at http://www.ecauldron.com/forum/ -- if you would like to participate in discussions like those you see here, please visit our new vBulletin message board, register an account and join in our discussions. We hope you will find the information in this message archive useful and will consider joining us on our new board.

[sailor_tech]

er - no.  You may have made a valid point, but you did so in a way that was infuriating and circular, and didn't touch the actual PROBLEM at hand at all.

Was the law in question the only problem - no.  Is the fact that a girl felt DRIVEN TO SELF-ABORT WITH A PENCIL A BAD THING?

uh, yeah!  And things which lead to that are BAD and if we can, we should find ways to correct them!

Whether or not the specific wording of the law went that way is pretty damn irrelevant if that's the impression of the law.

I disagree. I asked "Other than the person writing the article you link to is an lying about the state of the law in PA? "  The response back was that it was a parental consent state, implying that the article was right. Chabas, correctly, asked for proof, which I provided a few hours later when I had time. The proofs I offered where a re-bolding of the relevent section posted by an earlier poster showing judicial by-pass and in a seperate post links to Planned Parenthood in PA on how judicial by-pass works and how PP will help with the process.

The wording of the law is critical if the discussion is how the law gave her no legal options for an abortion. Since that seems to have been the point of the KOS article and the articles linked in it, that seems pretty important.

My first response to Inca might have been to short and not covering her actual point. Not that she actually looked at the links I posted or knew how judicial by-pass worked as her reason to say it didn't work.



Notice my responses to Mandrina and Skyth.  

[HeartShadow - Cutethulhu]

I disagree. I asked "Other than the person writing the article you link to is an lying about the state of the law in PA? "  The response back was that it was a parental consent state, implying that the article was right. Chabas, correctly, asked for proof, which I provided a few hours later when I had time. The proofs I offered where a re-bolding of the relevent section posted by an earlier poster showing judicial by-pass and in a seperate post links to Planned Parenthood in PA on how judicial by-pass works and how PP will help with the process.

The wording of the law is critical if the discussion is how the law gave her no legal options for an abortion. Since that seems to have been the point of the KOS article and the articles linked in it, that seems pretty important.

My first response to Inca might have been to short and not covering her actual point. Not that she actually looked at the links I posted or knew how judicial by-pass worked as her reason to say it didn't work.



Notice my responses to Mandrina and Skyth.  

what I've *noticed* is a lot of one-liners that don't actually say anything but seem created to make people chase after you begging for answers.  Like a trail of breadcrumbs to lead to where you've already decided we need to go.

Again.  Biggest problem here - that the girl FELT she had no options.  Not that technically she could have tried to find a judge if she knew the law - that the PERCEPTION was that she had no legal options.

[Starglade]

what I've *noticed* is a lot of one-liners that don't actually say anything but seem created to make people chase after you begging for answers.  Like a trail of breadcrumbs to lead to where you've already decided we need to go.

Again.  Biggest problem here - that the girl FELT she had no options.  Not that technically she could have tried to find a judge if she knew the law - that the PERCEPTION was that she had no legal options.

^^^^^ This.

Acknowledging that I have taken only four public administration courses, and that I admit "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing": The *perception* of how a law functions is just as important--perhaps moreso--than the actuality of its functioning. If those affected by the law *perceive* that, using this particular example, they "have no options" they will make choices based on that perception.

Being in the realm of public health as I am (that was the focus of my still-not-dry-ink-on-paper BA in health care admin, and will be the focus of my Master's degree if I am accepted), I have a theoretical dog in this fight. Having a 13yo daughter who has a boyfriend and will very likely--whether I like it or not--become sexually active within the next few years, I have an ACTUAL dog in this fight. Perception is VITAL to understanding; misperceptions should be avoided when at all possible, through education, explanation, and clear language. (Not that I ever expect clear language in a law. That's just too much to ask, I know.)

[sailor_tech]

what I've *noticed* is a lot of one-liners that don't actually say anything but seem created to make people chase after you begging for answers.  Like a trail of breadcrumbs to lead to where you've already decided we need to go.

Again.  Biggest problem here - that the girl FELT she had no options.  Not that technically she could have tried to find a judge if she knew the law - that the PERCEPTION was that she had no legal options.

Then how do you change the perception of the law by changing the law?

[HeartShadow - Cutethulhu]

Then how do you change the perception of the law by changing the law?

Change the attitudes.  Make it clear that if someone needs an abortion they can get one without question or fight or parents.  Stop criminalizing the people that get knocked up against their will.

Might not be legally criminals (Though some laws always seem to be trying to change that) but they're effectively "bad women" - this girl felt she had NO CHOICE.

That's what it's about.  Choice.  Options.  A way out that doesn't involve all the crazy stuff that keeps happening with girls with no options.

Or, of course, more dead children afraid of having babies.  Always an option.

[sailor_tech]

^^^^^ This.

Acknowledging that I have taken only four public administration courses, and that I admit "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing": The *perception* of how a law functions is just as important--perhaps moreso--than the actuality of its functioning. If those affected by the law *perceive* that, using this particular example, they "have no options" they will make choices based on that perception.

Being in the realm of public health as I am (that was the focus of my still-not-dry-ink-on-paper BA in health care admin, and will be the focus of my Master's degree if I am accepted), I have a theoretical dog in this fight. Having a 13yo daughter who has a boyfriend and will very likely--whether I like it or not--become sexually active within the next few years, I have an ACTUAL dog in this fight. Perception is VITAL to understanding; misperceptions should be avoided when at all possible, through education, explanation, and clear language. (Not that I ever expect clear language in a law. That's just too much to ask, I know.)

Bolding of the quote is mine.

I have had a dog in this fight for 5 years. In less than a year she won't have to ask permission. Although from my pharmacy bills, it should never would have become an issue.

Blaming this on just parental consent, basically saying that this would not have happened if she didn't need consent is the point.

I had a chance to talk to an old friend this morning who is involved in this for past few decades as is one of her grown sons. He's got the Master in in public health or some such and his job is hunting down kids who have unknowingly gotten an STD.  

Biggest hurdle is knowing that they can talk to an adult about being pregnant. It could be school nurse, PP, older friend, sibling etc. After that the machinary is easy.

[sailor_tech]

Change the attitudes.  Make it clear that if someone needs an abortion they can get one without question or fight or parents.  Stop criminalizing the people that get knocked up against their will.

Might not be legally criminals (Though some laws always seem to be trying to change that) but they're effectively "bad women" - this girl felt she had NO CHOICE.

That's what it's about.  Choice.  Options.  A way out that doesn't involve all the crazy stuff that keeps happening with girls with no options.

Or, of course, more dead children afraid of having babies.  Always an option.

It's not the laws that is stopping girls in states with judicial by-pass or with any other way around at least one parent. You don't have to change the law as it is in PA to achieve this.

[Inca]

My first response to Inca might have been to short and not covering her actual point. Not that she actually looked at the links I posted or knew how judicial by-pass worked as her reason to say it didn't work.

This is quite an assumption about me, and
1. you can't know
2. it's wrong

I did read the links, I had trouble however connecting the dots, because the statements were very unspecified and it wasn't clear at first what you were referring to. (Yes, I think lots of this debate could have skipped if a little more explanation was added.)

And I am still not sure why you chose a big word as 'lying' for something that seems at best a misrepresentation because, well, we humans tend to leave out all the extra words stating exactly which loopholes apply. Because that makes language awful longwinded - and not everything needs to be written in legalese.

You know, it would really have helped if you more explained what you are getting at. As someone already stated: let's look at the intent. The intent of your posts still mystifies me... you state something is wrong, but don't provide an explanation at all. Why?

I'll leave it know, and move on the topic at hand, but I'd appreciate it if you did not resort to assumptions about my knowledge of English or my reading of the articles, thanks.

[mandrina]

It's not the laws that is stopping girls in states with judicial by-pass or with any other way around at least one parent. You don't have to change the law as it is in PA to achieve this.

I agree with the idea that perception is important, but my suspicions are that in this case, even if the law had given her a free and completely private abortion, this 13 year would not have been able to get one, particularly in this situation.  In which case, the law is actually irrelevant, whether or not the state required parental notification or consent.  She didn't have what she needed to get an abortion, which was a trusted adult. So in this case, the article is probably incorrect about parental notification/consent causing the problem.

I don't actually like the idea of parental notification, even though my dog is 16 and sexually active (grr).  While I really would want her to tell me, if she doesn't trust me enough to tell me, there's probably a good reason, because as I've pointed out to her numerous times, big things like this, I will eventually find out, and it's better if I know early and we've talked enough, I think she understands, that if the situation arises, we will deal with it, however we need to deal with it, in a way not harmful to her.

[Inca]

Might not be legally criminals (Though some laws always seem to be trying to change that) but they're effectively "bad women" - this girl felt she had NO CHOICE.

It is interesting, and weird because, somehow, the ones that put the laws in place need to prove both sides of the case. On the one hand, they put the laws in place for exactly the reason that it should make abortion getting harder to get at - otherwise,what would be the point. And at the same time they need to prove that it is not putting an 'undue burden' on the girls because there are alternatives.
(If judicial bypass is a no-brainer, a rubber stamp as suggested in some of the articles I've read, it mainly seems a huge waste of money to put in place more bureaucrasy. Restrictions are only useful if they restrict something...)

I do think it is mainly a case about better education though. And safe, confidential places, more accessible than they already are. But the laws as they are don't seem to help and they really do stigmatize.

[SunflowerP]

In which case, the law is actually irrelevant, whether or not the state required parental notification or consent.  She didn't have what she needed to get an abortion, which was a trusted adult. So in this case, the article is probably incorrect about parental notification/consent causing the problem.

THIS, a thousand times this.

Sunflower

[sailor_tech]

It is interesting, and weird because, somehow, the ones that put the laws in place need to prove both sides of the case. On the one hand, they put the laws in place for exactly the reason that it should make abortion getting harder to get at - otherwise,what would be the point. And at the same time they need to prove that it is not putting an 'undue burden' on the girls because there are alternatives.
(If judicial bypass is a no-brainer, a rubber stamp as suggested in some of the articles I've read, it mainly seems a huge waste of money to put in place more bureaucrasy. Restrictions are only useful if they restrict something...)

I do think it is mainly a case about better education though. And safe, confidential places, more accessible than they already are. But the laws as they are don't seem to help and they really do stigmatize.

I suspect a lot has to do with precedent.  I don't think the court wants to rule that medical decisions are totally up to minors. That would call into question things like: drinking age, age of consent for sex; driving; etc.

The legislature can ignore that part of the issue becasue they are not as bound by precedent. A ruling granting rights to minors for abortion on demand is not the same as the legislature removing parental involvement in that specific act.

[Collinsky]

And I say this in agreement that the article's misstatement is misleading and worth noting.  I just don't agree that it was worth derailing the thread over.  You know what it's called when you're able to put debates about the letter of the law above debates about the impact of the law?  Privilege.

Sunflower

*slow clap to standing ovation*

[Satsekhem]

Here is the original article as taken from the LeHigh Valley newspaper.

The girl was probably shoved in the direction of a self-abortion because of the 30-year-old male, so chances are, it would have happened anyway. What the hell ever; this is ridiculous.

STAFF: please lock this thread.

[sailor_tech]

Here is the original article as taken from the LeHigh Valley newspaper.

The girl was probably shoved in the direction of a self-abortion because of the 30-year-old male, so chances are, it would have happened anyway. What the hell ever; this is ridiculous.

STAFF: please lock this thread.

Well, if you want to play that game.

[Tags:]

Jump to: Please select a destination: ----------------------------- About The Cauldron ----------------------------- => Rules and Regulations => Cauldron Announcements ===> Volunteers Needed: Site Assistants and Projects => Introductions => Board Questions, Suggestions, and Feedback => Chat and CauldronMUX Support => Test Board ----------------------------- Religion and Philosophy ----------------------------- => Paganism For Beginners => Books and Other Resources => Pagan Religions => Pagan Spirituality => Gods, Goddesses, and Mythology => Worship and Ritual => Holidays and Festivals => History and Religion => Faith in Everyday Life => Philosophy and Metaphysics => Non-Pagan Religions and Interfaith Discussions => Miscellaneous Religious Discussions ----------------------------- Magic and the Occult ----------------------------- => Magic and the Occult for Beginners => Witchcraft, Hoodoo, and Folk Magic => The Western Magical Tradition => Chaos Magic => Lodges and Other Magic Organizations => Miscellaneous Magical Discussions ----------------------------- Special Interest Groups & Special Discussions ----------------------------- => Special Topic Discussions => Chavi Memorial Chronic Illness SIG => General SIGS ===> College Pagans SIG ===> Cooking SIG ===> Divination SIG ===> Home and Garden SIG ===> Pagan Parents SIG ===> Teen Pagans SIG => Religious SIGS ===> Asatru and Heathenry SIG ===> Cauldron Cill ===> FlameKeeping SIG ===> Hazel and Oak: A Celtic Polytheism SIG ===> Neo-Druidry SIG ===> Reformed Kemeticism SIG ===> Ta Hiera Hellenic Polytheism SIG => Book/Media Discussion Boards ===> Academic Book Discussions ===> Pagan Religion Book Discussions ===> Magick Book Discussions ===> Fiction Book Discussions ===> DVD/Video Discussions ----------------------------- Life, the Universe, and Everything Else ----------------------------- => Pagan Announcements => Prayer and Energy Requests => News and Politics ===> Religious News ===> Non-Religious News ===> Political Discussions => Social Discussion Boards ===> Art, Poetry and Writing ===> Books ===> Computers and the Internet ===> Crafts and Hobbies ===> Family Life ===> Gaming ===> Health and Medicine ===> Humor and Quizzes ===> Music, Television, and Film ===> Pets ===> Science and Technology ===> Sports and Recreation