Schools Helping Kids Get Secret Abortions?

[Coito ergo sum]

Schools are helping teenage girls keep abortions secret from their parents. Imogen Neale reports.

A MOTHER is angry her 16-year-old daughter had a secret abortion arranged by a school counsellor.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sunday-star-time ... -abortions

I can certainly understand if there are issues of incest or abuse by the parents. But, absent that, there is hardly any kid who is not going to think that her parents would "react badly" or that she'd "get in trouble." The idea that parents ought not be told before a medical procedure is done is, to me, at first blush just plain ridiculous. Parents need to give permission for kids to get tattoos, for crying out loud. Parents need to give permission for kids to have any other non-emergency surgery.

[Feck]

If she is 16 I think she has a right to medical confidentiality in the UK

[MrJonno]

If she is 16 I think she has a right to medical confidentiality in the UK

She has the right of medical confidentiality at the age the doctor determines she is capable of taking responsibility for her health, which can be as little as 12. Doctors are required to try to persuad a minor to tell their parents about such matters but if they refuse can treat the patient anyway

[Santa_Claus]

At 16 she is old enough to take it up the arse without parental consent.

[PsychoSerenity]

Obviously the counsellor should be offering help and advice about how to talk about such issues with parents - but if the kid has any reason or just wants it kept quiet, surely confidentiality comes first. If a kid can't trust their school counsellor not to blab to their parents, what's the point in having a school counsellor?

And if a parent wants to know what's going on in their children's lives but the children don't want to talk, then there are other problems. It may only be a small issue of trust or embarrassment or a struggle in the relationship due to the kids growing up and pushing new boundaries - and yes it's quite a common problem, but the way to solve it is more openness, honesty, willingness to listen on the part of the parents - not to demand information from counsellors.

It starts off:

A MOTHER is angry her 16-year-old daughter had a secret abortion arranged by a school counsellor.

Then later:

One teacher told the Sunday Star-Times she had seen parents become "absolutely livid" after finding out they had been kept out of abortion decisions.

I don't know about anyone else, but if someone I cared about went through some trouble and they didn't feel they could share it with me, I would be grateful not angry that there was someone who they could share it with - and I'd feel sad they couldn't trust me, and I'd do my best to fix that.

[Warren Dew]

I can certainly understand if there are issues of incest or abuse by the parents. But, absent that, there is hardly any kid who is not going to think that her parents would "react badly" or that she'd "get in trouble." The idea that parents ought not be told before a medical procedure is done is, to me, at first blush just plain ridiculous. Parents need to give permission for kids to get tattoos, for crying out loud. Parents need to give permission for kids to have any other non-emergency surgery.

This would make sense if parental permission were also needed in order to get pregnant in the first place.

[Coito ergo sum]

Obviously the counsellor should be offering help and advice about how to talk about such issues with parents - but if the kid has any reason or just wants it kept quiet, surely confidentiality comes first. If a kid can't trust their school counsellor not to blab to their parents, what's the point in having a school counsellor?

And if a parent wants to know what's going on in their children's lives but the children don't want to talk, then there are other problems. It may only be a small issue of trust or embarrassment or a struggle in the relationship due to the kids growing up and pushing new boundaries - and yes it's quite a common problem, but the way to solve it is more openness, honesty, willingness to listen on the part of the parents - not to demand information from counsellors.

It starts off:

A MOTHER is angry her 16-year-old daughter had a secret abortion arranged by a school counsellor.

Then later:

One teacher told the Sunday Star-Times she had seen parents become "absolutely livid" after finding out they had been kept out of abortion decisions.

I don't know about anyone else, but if someone I cared about went through some trouble and they didn't feel they could share it with me, I would be grateful not angry that there was someone who they could share it with - and I'd feel sad they couldn't trust me, and I'd do my best to fix that.

If you had a daughter and she got pregnant, and the school personnel saw fit to disregard your parental rights (and responsibilities) you might be livid as well.

[Coito ergo sum]

I can certainly understand if there are issues of incest or abuse by the parents. But, absent that, there is hardly any kid who is not going to think that her parents would "react badly" or that she'd "get in trouble." The idea that parents ought not be told before a medical procedure is done is, to me, at first blush just plain ridiculous. Parents need to give permission for kids to get tattoos, for crying out loud. Parents need to give permission for kids to have any other non-emergency surgery.

This would make sense if parental permission were also needed in order to get pregnant in the first place.

I'm not certain how that relates. Up to a certain age, the sex involved might be statutory rape. The article discusses how school officials hushed it up out of fear the parents might want statutory rape prosecuted. I raised an eyebrow at that, because it sounds like being an accessory after the fact.

[Warren Dew]

Up to a certain age, the sex involved might be statutory rape. The article discusses how school officials hushed it up out of fear the parents might want statutory rape prosecuted. I raised an eyebrow at that, because it sounds like being an accessory after the fact.

Underage pregnancy is most often the result of sex between two minors. Yes, that's technically statutory rape, but both partners are guilty of it. Most parents would not want their own teen prosecuted for statutory rape.

[Coito ergo sum]

Up to a certain age, the sex involved might be statutory rape. The article discusses how school officials hushed it up out of fear the parents might want statutory rape prosecuted. I raised an eyebrow at that, because it sounds like being an accessory after the fact.

Underage pregnancy is most often the result of sex between two minors. Yes, that's technically statutory rape, but both partners are guilty of it. Most parents would not want their own teen prosecuted for statutory rape.

However, most parents consider it their business what is going on with their children medical, nor do medical privacy laws generally apply to parents. That's why a mother can be with her daughter in an exam room. Parents generally also need to be informed before medical procedures are done to their children or drugs administered.

[PsychoSerenity]

If you had a daughter and she got pregnant, and the school personnel saw fit to disregard your parental rights (and responsibilities) you might be livid as well.

What rights? And how do these rights override someone's rights to confidential medical help?

The article discusses how school officials hushed it up out of fear the parents might want statutory rape prosecuted. I raised an eyebrow at that, because it sounds like being an accessory after the fact.

No - it says "girls sometimes did not want to tell their parents for fear they would react badly or demand prosecutions for statutory rape" i.e. they might be protecting their boyfriends.

[PsychoSerenity]

nor do medical privacy laws generally apply to parents. That's why a mother can be with her daughter in an exam room.

The mother can be, sure, anyone can be. But if the girl is old enough to ask that her mother not be there, it would be very strange if a doctor allowed the mother to demand to be there.

[Coito ergo sum]

If you had a daughter and she got pregnant, and the school personnel saw fit to disregard your parental rights (and responsibilities) you might be livid as well.

What rights?

Providing a home for the child
Having contact with and living with the child
Protecting and maintaining the child
Disciplining the child
Choosing and providing for the child’s education
Choosing the child’s religion
Agreeing on the child’s health and medical care
Consenting to medical treatment for the child
Accessing the child’s medical and educational records
Naming the child
Responsibility for the child’s property
Allowing confidential information about the child to be disclosed

These are the basic rights and responsibilities of parents under English law (and American law) and most have been parental rights and responsibilities since early English common law and even pre-Christian Anglo-Saxon common law.

And how do these rights override someone's rights to confidential medical help?

Confidential from whom? The parents who are the legal guardians of the child? The parents aren't third parties, generally speaking, in that regard. I must confess, I haven't read recent English statutory law on the topic, so maybe there is a right of children to undergo medical procedures without their parents' knowledge.

And, I didn't say anything about anyone being denied medical help. I said that if you were a parent and someone did this without your knowledge, you'd probably be livid too.

The article discusses how school officials hushed it up out of fear the parents might want statutory rape prosecuted. I raised an eyebrow at that, because it sounds like being an accessory after the fact.

No - it says "girls sometimes did not want to tell their parents for fear they would react badly or demand prosecutions for statutory rape" i.e. they might be protecting their boyfriends.

And, if there is a statutory rape, and the counselor takes affirmative steps to protect the perpetrator from prosecution, that sounds like textbook accessory after the fact: A person who knowing that an offense has been committed assists an offender in eluding apprehension.

[nellikin]

Do you really believe that at age 16 the parents still have the right to decide upon medical procedures of such profound importance. What if the parents oppose abortion and had the right to force the young lady to have a baby against her wishes? Does that respect her right to sovereignity over her body and life? When it comes to sex and abortion - once the body is old enough to conceive, the "child" (which I wouldn't actually call a 16 year old) needs to have rights into decisions made about her body. Of course, guidance and support are required in the matter, but if she doesn't feel like she can trust her parents, than a counsellor is the next best thing.

Is it statutory rape if both parties are underage? If she was 16 at the time, it wouldn't have been stat rape her, so I don't actually think it is relevant to this case (though in general perhaps it can be).

[Coito ergo sum]

nor do medical privacy laws generally apply to parents. That's why a mother can be with her daughter in an exam room.

The mother can be, sure, anyone can be. But if the girl is old enough to ask that her mother not be there, it would be very strange if a doctor allowed the mother to demand to be there.

It would also be very strange for a doctor to administer medical care or procedures to a person's legal guardian without that legal guardian being informed and apprised of what is going on. That's the point of having a legal guardian. If there is an emergency, then emergency services must be provided. However, it would seem in non-emergency situations the parents would normally have the right to make medical decisions on behalf of their children.