Parental Consent for Tanning

Post Reply
Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Parental Consent for Tanning

Post by Coito ergo sum » Fri Feb 24, 2012 12:55 pm

MrJonno wrote:
Pappa wrote:
Seth wrote:
andrewclunn wrote:I support this legislation.
Do you support parental notification and consent for a minor to get an abortion or birth control products?

If not, why not? What's the difference between the dangers of tanning and the dangers of an abortion or STD's?
I think there is a significant difference. A parent refusing to allow their child access to an abortion or contraception could potentially be putting their child at greater risk (or greater risk of detriment to their life) than if the minor had access to these without their parents' knowledge. Tanning has no significant benefits to the individual, while abortion and contraception have clear benefits to some, benefits that often outweigh the risks.

I think your point about STDs is a red herring too... educating people about the risks from STDs is a separate issue and something which should happen regardless of whether they have access to contraception and/or abortion.
Doctors in the UK are bar law required to encourage the minor (the term child really is not appropiate) to talk to their parents in regard to abortion or contraception however if they believe they are competent to give informed consent they can go ahead anyway with abortion or contraceptives as the consequences of them not granting it could be extremely serious.

The consequence for not getting access to a tanning machine is well no tan
That would seem to me to be a factor in favor of parental notification/consent to abortions rather than tanning salons. Parents are supposed to be involved in the important decisions effecting their children's lives. It's not like it should be that parents get to handle the irrelevant or minor details, and the really important stuff the kid can decide on for themselves....

MrJonno
Posts: 3442
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 7:24 am
Contact:

Re: Parental Consent for Tanning

Post by MrJonno » Fri Feb 24, 2012 1:05 pm

That would seem to me to be a factor in favor of parental notification/consent to abortions rather than tanning salons. Parents are supposed to be involved in the important decisions effecting their children's lives. It's not like it should be that parents get to handle the irrelevant or minor details, and the really important stuff the kid can decide on for themselves...
I would argue tanning probably has more potential medical consequences than having an abortion or taking contraceptives. Neither are as serious as actually having a baby
When only criminals carry guns the police know exactly who to shoot!

User avatar
Pappa
Non-Practicing Anarchist
Non-Practicing Anarchist
Posts: 56488
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:42 am
About me: I am sacrificing a turnip as I type.
Location: Le sud du Pays de Galles.
Contact:

Re: Parental Consent for Tanning

Post by Pappa » Fri Feb 24, 2012 2:33 pm

Coito ergo sum wrote:That would seem to me to be a factor in favor of parental notification/consent to abortions rather than tanning salons. Parents are supposed to be involved in the important decisions effecting their children's lives. It's not like it should be that parents get to handle the irrelevant or minor details, and the really important stuff the kid can decide on for themselves....
What if the parents are cunts?

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Parental Consent for Tanning

Post by Coito ergo sum » Fri Feb 24, 2012 2:38 pm

Pappa wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote:That would seem to me to be a factor in favor of parental notification/consent to abortions rather than tanning salons. Parents are supposed to be involved in the important decisions effecting their children's lives. It's not like it should be that parents get to handle the irrelevant or minor details, and the really important stuff the kid can decide on for themselves....
What if the parents are cunts?
That argument would apply to the provision of food and shelter too, or the choice of what school to send the child to, or whether to attend the prom.

User avatar
hadespussercats
I've come for your pants.
Posts: 18586
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 12:27 am
About me: Looks pretty good, coming out of the back of his neck like that.
Location: Gotham
Contact:

Re: Parental Consent for Tanning

Post by hadespussercats » Fri Feb 24, 2012 2:52 pm

Coito, are you really in favor of parental consent laws for abortions and contraception? Or are you just pursuing an interesting rhetorical connection?
The green careening planet
spins blindly in the dark
so close to annihilation.

Listen. No one listens. Meow.

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Parental Consent for Tanning

Post by Coito ergo sum » Fri Feb 24, 2012 2:57 pm

hadespussercats wrote:Coito, are you really in favor of parental consent laws for abortions and contraception? Or are you just pursuing an interesting rhetorical connection?
The latter, or both - because I'm not sure where my cut-off line is for abortions and contraception.

I am definitely for parental consent at some point for abortions and contraception. I mean - an 11 or 12 year old? Surgical procedures and prescription meds probably ought to have parental involvement.

A 16 year old? That may be old enough to make such decisions.

I am not sure where I stand on this issue.

User avatar
hadespussercats
I've come for your pants.
Posts: 18586
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 12:27 am
About me: Looks pretty good, coming out of the back of his neck like that.
Location: Gotham
Contact:

Re: Parental Consent for Tanning

Post by hadespussercats » Fri Feb 24, 2012 4:06 pm

Coito ergo sum wrote:
hadespussercats wrote:Coito, are you really in favor of parental consent laws for abortions and contraception? Or are you just pursuing an interesting rhetorical connection?
The latter, or both - because I'm not sure where my cut-off line is for abortions and contraception.

I am definitely for parental consent at some point for abortions and contraception. I mean - an 11 or 12 year old? Surgical procedures and prescription meds probably ought to have parental involvement.

A 16 year old? That may be old enough to make such decisions.

I am not sure where I stand on this issue.
I could be wrong, but I tend to think if a twelve-year-old is pregnant, her parents probably aren't good people to talk about sex with.

And I think the standard medical establishment would back me up that a twelve-year-old shouldn't carry a pregnancy to term, regardless of what her parents think-- her body just isn't developed enough to handle it.

As for going on contraception-- yeah, sure, if a kid can talk about that sort of thing with her parents, it'd be nice for them to be involved. I guess.
No. Actually, I still don't think that. A kid who wants to have sex will find a way, and better they get some contraception that will work even for inexperienced folks (who might not put on a condom correctly, or what have you) than be scared off by a requirement to have a conversation with their parents they'd rather avoid.

I went on BC pills when I was 15. I knew I could talk to my parents about it, but I didn't want to. It was none of their business. And I'm happy with how that played out.
The green careening planet
spins blindly in the dark
so close to annihilation.

Listen. No one listens. Meow.

MrJonno
Posts: 3442
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 7:24 am
Contact:

Re: Parental Consent for Tanning

Post by MrJonno » Fri Feb 24, 2012 4:18 pm

At 11/12 its quite within the doctors right to refuse to do on the grounds of informed consent and hopefully she/he would encourage the child to go to the police.

With an age of consent of 16 in the UK (including any medical operation) and sex the norm at 14-15 for a doctor to refuse would be absurd. The police even if informed would not intervene most the time unless there was a big difference in age or obvious coercion.

I think to most Brits and Europeans an age of consent of 18 is insane but on that basis I can see why an American would see an 16 year old as a child
When only criminals carry guns the police know exactly who to shoot!

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Parental Consent for Tanning

Post by Coito ergo sum » Fri Feb 24, 2012 4:34 pm

hadespussercats wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote:
hadespussercats wrote:Coito, are you really in favor of parental consent laws for abortions and contraception? Or are you just pursuing an interesting rhetorical connection?
The latter, or both - because I'm not sure where my cut-off line is for abortions and contraception.

I am definitely for parental consent at some point for abortions and contraception. I mean - an 11 or 12 year old? Surgical procedures and prescription meds probably ought to have parental involvement.

A 16 year old? That may be old enough to make such decisions.

I am not sure where I stand on this issue.
I could be wrong, but I tend to think if a twelve-year-old is pregnant, her parents probably aren't good people to talk about sex with.
I think that is a bit of a stretch. It's not just the children of bad parents who get pregnant, or are sexually active.
hadespussercats wrote:
And I think the standard medical establishment would back me up that a twelve-year-old shouldn't carry a pregnancy to term, regardless of what her parents think-- her body just isn't developed enough to handle it.
I don't know that to be true, but perhaps. I tend to think of these things as medical decisions, and I tend to place the parental responsibility relative to medical issues on the parents.
hadespussercats wrote:
As for going on contraception-- yeah, sure, if a kid can talk about that sort of thing with her parents, it'd be nice for them to be involved. I guess.
This idea of "if a kid can talk about that sort of thing with her parents" always comes up. If that's the test, then parents are no longer parents in any respect, and they are just child support payers, since every issue arising in a child's life involves interaction with the parents.
hadespussercats wrote: No. Actually, I still don't think that. A kid who wants to have sex will find a way, and better they get some contraception that will work even for inexperienced folks (who might not put on a condom correctly, or what have you) than be scared off by a requirement to have a conversation with their parents they'd rather avoid.
I am not sure that a child deceiving his or her parents is something that ought to be considered a matter of State policy.
hadespussercats wrote:
I went on BC pills when I was 15. I knew I could talk to my parents about it, but I didn't want to. It was none of their business. And I'm happy with how that played out.
It kind of is their business, since you are their responsibility and under their care and custody. They are a 15 year old's legal guardian.

Now, I am not sure about this issue, so don't get me wrong. I'm not saying "no, they shouldn't be allowed..." this or that. I'm not sure, and thinking through it.

One thing that really irks me along these lines is this show that I've stumbled across on MTV a time or two -- some show about teenagers having babies. I don't really care what they do, mind you - I am certainly not a moralizer -- what bothers me is the attitude. They seem to have an attitude not only of it being nobody else's business, and their own unfettered decision whether to have a baby at the age of 15 or something -- not only that -- they take it to the next step to suggest that everybody else has to RESPECT the decision AND fund it, so that they have no or diminished financial repurcussions. Everyone, for some reason - the parents - siblings - friends - "society" --- is supposed "support" them in their decisions. Not sure how that fits in, but I just thought of it, and I threw it out there.

Me -- I'm pro-choice and to the extent I can help it my daughter will be raised to be an independent person, who doesn't take shit from anyone, and who makes her own decisions regarding her own body. I certainly am expecting a sexually active being to develop, and conversations about sex and reproduction are no problem for me. She won't, however, be anything like this "MTV teen mom" generation of spoiled, entitled children.

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Parental Consent for Tanning

Post by Coito ergo sum » Fri Feb 24, 2012 4:44 pm

MrJonno wrote:
I think to most Brits and Europeans an age of consent of 18 is insane but on that basis I can see why an American would see an 16 year old as a child
The age of consent in the US is generally 16.

The states that have 18 figured in are those that have an "age gap" provision, which basically tells older men to avoid trolling the high schools. I.e. - -like -- if the adult is over 25, and the teenager only 17, then there is too much of a gap.

That's the way I voluntarily behaved in my life. I had sex in high school - when I was 16 I had sex with only girls of my same age. When I was 18 I entered college and started dating college girls. I did have a girlfriend who was 17 and a senior in high school when I was 19, but that's mainly because she was so smoking hot that I gave my "no high school girls" rule a pass. Damn, I remember her to this day. Amazing. But, I digress. After that, I would never date a high school girl. My friend's sister showed up to college once when I was 19 and she was 16 -- she was all over me, but I declined. I ended up dating her when she was 18 and I was 21, though. I think, personally, there is a difference between 16 and 18, and certainly a difference between 16 and 21, in our culture.

I don't care how hot or willing a 16 year old girl is, I would never, at my age, have sex with her. I have too much of a fatherly instinct. She's just a teenager, and knows nothing, but thinks she knows everything. I think that a girl of that age would be better off waiting, and since my intentions would never be for a quality emotional relationship with someone that much younger than me, I think I'd be doing the right thing by declining.

User avatar
hadespussercats
I've come for your pants.
Posts: 18586
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 12:27 am
About me: Looks pretty good, coming out of the back of his neck like that.
Location: Gotham
Contact:

Re: Parental Consent for Tanning

Post by hadespussercats » Fri Feb 24, 2012 4:53 pm

"This idea of "if a kid can talk about that sort of thing with her parents" always comes up. If that's the test, then parents are no longer parents in any respect, and they are just child support payers, since every issue arising in a child's life involves interaction with the parents. "
Coito, For many people sex is a particularly awkward subject. Even more so between parents and children. Parents and children who have a good rapport on other levels might still have difficulty broaching this subject together. I'm not saying that's how it should be-- I'm saying that's how it is.

As for a twelve-year-old getting pregnant-- you say, "It's not just the children of bad parents who get pregnant, or are sexually active."

My comment wasn't about whether or not the parents were bad people. My comment was about the fact that getting pregnant at age twelve is unusual, in that many girls are just hitting menarche at around that age, and in that while there certainly are many kids who are sexually active that young, it's still awfully young to be having sex, even by modern American standards ( I can find research for that point, if you need it.)

Parents who are comfortable talking about sex with their children, who talk to them about risks, who are open to questions, aren't likely, in my opinion or experience , to have a pregnant twelve-year-old daughter-- unless she was raped.

I can also find you research/commentary about physical development in general and cervical development in particular that support my assertion that for most girls, carrying a pregnancy to term at age 12 is dangerous. I don't have time to hunt for links now. But I think it's fairly obvious that most 12-year-olds are not ready to be parents.

As for "16 and Pregnant"-- I think the main reason people watch that show is because they're all train wrecks. I find it depressing. And I'm going to do what I can to inform my son about safe sex early on, so hopefully he never finds himself in that fix-- whether or not he ever tells me he's sexually active. I'd like him to know he could. But I understand that for most kids, their mom is the last person they want to talk to about stuff like that-- particularly once they're a teenager.
The green careening planet
spins blindly in the dark
so close to annihilation.

Listen. No one listens. Meow.

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Parental Consent for Tanning

Post by Coito ergo sum » Fri Feb 24, 2012 5:04 pm

hadespussercats wrote:
"This idea of "if a kid can talk about that sort of thing with her parents" always comes up. If that's the test, then parents are no longer parents in any respect, and they are just child support payers, since every issue arising in a child's life involves interaction with the parents. "
Coito, For many people sex is a particularly awkward subject. Even more so between parents and children. Parents and children who have a good rapport on other levels might still have difficulty broaching this subject together. I'm not saying that's how it should be-- I'm saying that's how it is.
I don't know how prevalent that is, and I think it's inadvisable to assume that just because other people may not be as libertine as some, that means they aren't communicative. I don't think parents have to approve of everything in order to be giving their children an open enough door for communication.

hadespussercats wrote: As for a twelve-year-old getting pregnant-- you say, "It's not just the children of bad parents who get pregnant, or are sexually active."

My comment wasn't about whether or not the parents were bad people. My comment was about the fact that getting pregnant at age twelve is unusual, in that many girls are just hitting menarche at around that age, and in that while there certainly are many kids who are sexually active that young, it's still awfully young to be having sex, even by modern American standards ( I can find research for that point, if you need it.)
Sure, but you said that if she got pregnant at age 12, it indicates that the parents did something wrong or bad.
hadespussercats wrote:
Parents who are comfortable talking about sex with their children, who talk to them about risks, who are open to questions, aren't likely, in my opinion or experience , to have a pregnant twelve-year-old daughter-- unless she was raped.
Well, based on the statistics, even those who are uncomfortable talking about sex with their children, who don't talk about risks, etc. are not likely to have a pregnant twelve-year old daughter. I don't know whether there is any statistical difference known.
hadespussercats wrote: I can also find you research/commentary about physical development in general and cervical development in particular that support my assertion that for most girls, carrying a pregnancy to term at age 12 is dangerous. I don't have time to hunt for links now. But I think it's fairly obvious that most 12-year-olds are not ready to be parents.
I don't know what you're suggesting this means in terms of the issue. If a child needs any medical treatment, the treatment is needed, yet parents still act as guardian and have authority to make decisions.
hadespussercats wrote:
As for "16 and Pregnant"-- I think the main reason people watch that show is because they're all train wrecks. I find it depressing. And I'm going to do what I can to inform my son about safe sex early on, so hopefully he never finds himself in that fix-- whether or not he ever tells me he's sexually active. I'd like him to know he could. But I understand that for most kids, their mom is the last person they want to talk to about stuff like that-- particularly once they're a teenager.
I'm not sure that merely talking about it with parents reduces the likelihood of pregnancy. But, I mean just that - I'm not sure - I don't know.

User avatar
hadespussercats
I've come for your pants.
Posts: 18586
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 12:27 am
About me: Looks pretty good, coming out of the back of his neck like that.
Location: Gotham
Contact:

Re: Parental Consent for Tanning

Post by hadespussercats » Fri Feb 24, 2012 5:18 pm

I don't know how prevalent that is, and I think it's inadvisable to assume that just because other people may not be as libertine as some, that means they aren't communicative. I don't think parents have to approve of everything in order to be giving their children an open enough door for communication.
I'm scratching my head over this. What does being libertine have to do with anything?

You're right-- parents don't have to approve of everything to be communicative.

But if a kid wants to have sex, and knows his or her parents don't approve of that, but want to do it anyway, that kid might skip getting effective contraception to avoid having to confront his or her parents with that choice. Which could lead to an unwanted pregnancy.

Incidentally, all these consent laws put the brunt of the issue on girls. Boys don't need to get consent to buy condoms. Boys don't have unwanted pregnancies, either-- though they may care about someone who does.

Did you tell your mom you were having sex? Back when you were 16, I mean?

as for this:
I don't know what you're suggesting this means in terms of the issue. If a child needs any medical treatment, the treatment is needed, yet parents still act as guardian and have authority to make decisions.
If the parents are on-board for the girl having the abortion she wants, then yes, it's good that they can help her and watch out for her. My commentary is in response to the fact that there are parents who would force their twelve-year-old daughter to carry a pregnancy to term. Which is something I find reprehensible. Actually, I think forcing anyone to carry a pregnancy to term is reprehensible, but particularly a child. Parents don't own their children's bodies. They are stewards. And I think one of the boundaries of that stewardship is controlling a daughter's pregnancy.
The green careening planet
spins blindly in the dark
so close to annihilation.

Listen. No one listens. Meow.

User avatar
hadespussercats
I've come for your pants.
Posts: 18586
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 12:27 am
About me: Looks pretty good, coming out of the back of his neck like that.
Location: Gotham
Contact:

Re: Parental Consent for Tanning

Post by hadespussercats » Fri Feb 24, 2012 5:23 pm

coito wrote:I'm not sure that merely talking about it with parents reduces the likelihood of pregnancy. But, I mean just that - I'm not sure - I don't know.
http://www.thenationalcampaign.org/pare ... _tips.aspx

http://kidshealth.org/parent/growth/sex ... pills.html

For a start.
The green careening planet
spins blindly in the dark
so close to annihilation.

Listen. No one listens. Meow.

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Parental Consent for Tanning

Post by Coito ergo sum » Fri Feb 24, 2012 5:35 pm

hadespussercats wrote:
I don't know how prevalent that is, and I think it's inadvisable to assume that just because other people may not be as libertine as some, that means they aren't communicative. I don't think parents have to approve of everything in order to be giving their children an open enough door for communication.
I'm scratching my head over this. What does being libertine have to do with anything?

You're right-- parents don't have to approve of everything to be communicative.
That is what I meant.
hadespussercats wrote:
But if a kid wants to have sex, and knows his or her parents don't approve of that, but want to do it anyway, that kid might skip getting effective contraception to avoid having to confront his or her parents with that choice. Which could lead to an unwanted pregnancy.
It could.
hadespussercats wrote:
Incidentally, all these consent laws put the brunt of the issue on girls. Boys don't need to get consent to buy condoms. Boys don't have unwanted pregnancies, either-- though they may care about someone who does.
This actually puts the brunt on boys, since they have to get the condoms. But, I think they have a female condom now, don't they? Although, admittedly, I haven't seen them around much.

hadespussercats wrote:
Did you tell your mom you were having sex? Back when you were 16, I mean?
Hell, no. But, I knew about condoms and birth control without their help, and their guidance was irrelevant to me. "Talking" to mom about it would have done nothing.
hadespussercats wrote:
as for this:
I don't know what you're suggesting this means in terms of the issue. If a child needs any medical treatment, the treatment is needed, yet parents still act as guardian and have authority to make decisions.
If the parents are on-board for the girl having the abortion she wants, then yes, it's good that they can help her and watch out for her. My commentary is in response to the fact that there are parents who would force their twelve-year-old daughter to carry a pregnancy to term. Which is something I find reprehensible. Actually, I think forcing anyone to carry a pregnancy to term is reprehensible, but particularly a child. Parents don't own their children's bodies. They are stewards. And I think one of the boundaries of that stewardship is controlling a daughter's pregnancy.
Yes, there is that. What to do if it is clear that it is purely the parents "forcing" a middle school girl to have a child. I agree with you there.

For me, if my daughter got pregnant at age 12, I'd recommend an early abortion, and hopefully by then the morning after pill can be kept around the house just in case. I'd then go find the male who did it, and deal with the situation.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 27 guests