Parental Consent for Tanning

Post Reply
Seth
GrandMaster Zen Troll
Posts: 22077
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:02 am
Contact:

Re: Parental Consent for Tanning

Post by Seth » Tue Feb 28, 2012 10:57 pm

mistermack wrote:If you give parents the power to prevent their daughters from having an abortion, on the grounds that they are minors and the parents are adults, then the same thing would apply in reverse.

The same logic says that a parent has the right to make a child HAVE an abortion, even though she doesn't want it.

Which is stupid. The "logic" of the argument is stupid.
No, it's not stupid. You don't have to ask a child if they want an appendectomy or chemo for cancer, you, as a parent, have the authority to make those decisions for the child because the child is incompetent to make those decisions for themselves. Abortion is no different. If your 12 year old pregnant daughter wants to keep the baby, that may not be a rational decision on her part and you, the parent, have the right and authority to override that choice.

Children are not adults. They don't enjoy the same panoply of rights that an adult does for the very good reason that they are not emotionally or mentally mature enough to make such decisions wisely. That's what parents are authorized to do until their child reaches the age of majority.

This asinine liberal notion that children are not subject to parental authority or decision making for no better reason than they don't want to be parented is just plain stupid, and it's why we have legions of adult children who are incapable of caring for themselves much less others. Children don't get to make such decisions, any more than they get to decide to drink, do drugs, drive, own guns, vote or anything else they are prohibited from doing, or are required to do (like go to school and obey their parents) by common law, statutory law, and long-standing social custom in every society on the face of the earth. There is no place where a child is free to do whatever they want from infancy, and every society has made a determination of at what age a child reaches legal majority and becomes fully autonomous. Prior to that, there is no such freedom for children, of necessity.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S

"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth

© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.

Seth
GrandMaster Zen Troll
Posts: 22077
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:02 am
Contact:

Re: Parental Consent for Tanning

Post by Seth » Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:02 pm

MrJonno wrote:
mistermack wrote:If you give parents the power to prevent their daughters from having an abortion, on the grounds that they are minors and the parents are adults, then the same thing would apply in reverse.

The same logic says that a parent has the right to make a child HAVE an abortion, even though she doesn't want it.

Which is stupid. The "logic" of the argument is stupid.
Which is why its bollocks, parents don't own children
They don't "own" them in the sense that they are commodities that can be traded on the market, but they do have broad power and authority to control the child, subject to their doing so in ways that are not physically harmful to the child (such as abuse). Within that broad authority is the authority to control their sexual behavior, their relationships and friends, their schooling, their religion, their behavior, their movements, and most pertinently their medical care in every situation. There are plenty of safeguards in the law for those few instances where a parent might abuse a child through medical care, and a guardian ad litem can always be appointed by the courts if it appears that a parent is making bad choices for the child. But under no circumstances does the child's wishes or desires overrule the decisions of the parent when it comes to their health, safety and welfare. A court, perhaps, if it's demonstrated that the parent is acting improperly, but never the child him or herself, sua sponte.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S

"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth

© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.

Seth
GrandMaster Zen Troll
Posts: 22077
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:02 am
Contact:

Re: Parental Consent for Tanning

Post by Seth » Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:06 pm

Psychoserenity wrote:
Seth wrote:
Psychoserenity wrote:
Seth wrote:Now, it may be that some parents won't give permission, which is their right, which will mean the 15 year old will have to carry the baby to term...
Why do you think a parent has a 'right' to prevent their 15 year old daughter from having an abortion?
Because she is a minor and they are her parents.
"Why?"

"Because".

Well that explains everything. :coffee:
What part of "she's a minor" do you fail to comprehend? The essence of the term "minor" is that she is a child who is not competent to make rational or proper decisions about her sexuality or her body by virtue of the fact that she is a child. You evidently want to elevate the child to the status of an adult, but that's something that only happens when the child becomes an adult, not out of some vague and unsupported notion that children should have full autonomy when they are utterly unprepared to properly exercise that autonomy. Somebody has to look out for the child, and the parents are the obvious candidates unless and until they demonstrate to a judge that they are not competent to parent.

Are you really supporting the notion that a 15 year old can make rational, competent, healthy decisions about her sexuality or pregnancy without any parental oversight or consultation? Really? Have you ever had children?
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S

"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth

© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.

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 » Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:28 pm

Seth wrote:Are you really supporting the notion that a 15 year old can make rational, competent, healthy decisions about her sexuality or pregnancy without any parental oversight or consultation? Really? Have you ever had children?
Yet this girl would make a good parent? Good parenting does require rational, competent, healthy decision-making. But then, you might not be aware of that, since you've never had children.
The green careening planet
spins blindly in the dark
so close to annihilation.

Listen. No one listens. Meow.

Seth
GrandMaster Zen Troll
Posts: 22077
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:02 am
Contact:

Re: Parental Consent for Tanning

Post by Seth » Wed Feb 29, 2012 2:12 am

hadespussercats wrote:
Seth wrote:Are you really supporting the notion that a 15 year old can make rational, competent, healthy decisions about her sexuality or pregnancy without any parental oversight or consultation? Really? Have you ever had children?
Yet this girl would make a good parent? Good parenting does require rational, competent, healthy decision-making. But then, you might not be aware of that, since you've never had children.
A teenage mother is not axiomatically on her own in parenting her child, there are plenty of resources available both within the family and without, and it's my observation that in most cases, when a woman (including a teen-age woman) has a child, it has a substantial positive effect on focusing her attention on proper child care.

The notion that an abortion is the only or even the best answer to teenage pregnancy is nothing more than an ideological knee-jerk snap judgment that fails to look carefully at all the facts and circumstances.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S

"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth

© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.

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 » Wed Feb 29, 2012 4:07 am

Seth wrote:
hadespussercats wrote:
Seth wrote:Are you really supporting the notion that a 15 year old can make rational, competent, healthy decisions about her sexuality or pregnancy without any parental oversight or consultation? Really? Have you ever had children?
Yet this girl would make a good parent? Good parenting does require rational, competent, healthy decision-making. But then, you might not be aware of that, since you've never had children.
A teenage mother is not axiomatically on her own in parenting her child, there are plenty of resources available both within the family and without, and it's my observation that in most cases, when a woman (including a teen-age woman) has a child, it has a substantial positive effect on focusing her attention on proper child care.

The notion that an abortion is the only or even the best answer to teenage pregnancy is nothing more than an ideological knee-jerk snap judgment that fails to look carefully at all the facts and circumstances.
Whether a teenaged girl could be a good mother or not is not the concern of parental consent laws.

Parents are not generally granted the right to force their daughter who wants to carry to term to have an abortion. And the issue of notification and consent only arises when a daughter who is pregnant wants to terminate-- the parents' consent was not required for her to become pregnant (I am speaking de facto here-- I recognize your point that parents can forbid their minor children to have sex. But many of those children still find a way, in a story as old as Adam-- literally.) Nor would their consent be required for their daughter to give birth-- even if they were four-square against the notion.

The only time parental consent is an applicable issue is when a minor daughter wants to have an abortion and her parents want her to carry the pregnancy to term. It's a measure that's not about promoting healthy communication among family members-- it's about stopping abortions from happening.

Abortions may not be the only answer to teen pregnancy, and in certain cases abortion might not be the best choice for an individual. But that choice needs to belong to the individual in question. Parents don't own their daughters' bodies.

You might point out again that parents can make the choice for their daughter to have her appendix removed. Could those parents choose for their daughter to have to keep that diseased appendix, though?

Parents are stewards for their children, with enormous responsibilities that shift and change, and ultimately fade. Their rights over their children's autonomy have limits.
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 » Wed Feb 29, 2012 4:13 am

seth wrote: it's my observation that in most cases, when a woman (including a teen-age woman) has a child, it has a substantial positive effect on focusing her attention on proper child care.
You're saying most mothers are good mothers, in your experience? Or are you saying that getting women focused on child care instead of other interests or needs is positive and proper?
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 » Wed Feb 29, 2012 9:30 am

No, it's not stupid. You don't have to ask a child if they want an appendectomy or chemo for cancer, you, as a parent, have the authority to make those decisions for the child because the child is incompetent to make those decisions for themselves. Abortion is no different. If your 12 year old pregnant daughter wants to keep the baby, that may not be a rational decision on her part and you, the parent, have the right and authority to override that choice.
Actually yes you do, if the doctor (not the parent) considers them competent (no courts required) a child can refuse treatment or ask for treatment. Obviously in a civilized country paying for it won't be an issue. If the child is very young under 12 etc its unlikely the doctor will take much value in their opinions unless supported by a parent but as they approach 16 the level of competency is considered greater

However if the parent is incompetent to make the decision (ie Jehovah's witnesses no blood) then it does take the courts to over rule them
When only criminals carry guns the police know exactly who to shoot!

User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 74293
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Parental Consent for Tanning

Post by JimC » Wed Feb 29, 2012 10:28 am

Svartalf wrote:
hadespussercats wrote:Will the kids need permission slips to lie in the sun?
Have you compared the UV doses you get from a tanning bed with those gotten from the natural sun?
Per time unit, tanning beds are significantly higher.
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

User avatar
Svartalf
Offensive Grail Keeper
Posts: 41174
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:42 pm
Location: Paris France
Contact:

Re: Parental Consent for Tanning

Post by Svartalf » Wed Feb 29, 2012 10:31 am

Thanks for destroying out the rhetoris from my rhetorical question.
Embrace the Darkness, it needs a hug

PC stands for "Patronizing Cocksucker" Randy Ping

User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 74293
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Parental Consent for Tanning

Post by JimC » Wed Feb 29, 2012 10:32 am

Svartalf wrote:Thanks for destroying out the rhetoris from my rhetorical question.
Rational evidence destroys rhetoric anytime...

:biggrin:
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

User avatar
Svartalf
Offensive Grail Keeper
Posts: 41174
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:42 pm
Location: Paris France
Contact:

Re: Parental Consent for Tanning

Post by Svartalf » Wed Feb 29, 2012 10:39 am

Which is how every major elected official in Western democracies has gotten into office, obviously.
Embrace the Darkness, it needs a hug

PC stands for "Patronizing Cocksucker" Randy Ping

Seth
GrandMaster Zen Troll
Posts: 22077
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:02 am
Contact:

Re: Parental Consent for Tanning

Post by Seth » Thu Mar 01, 2012 12:36 am

hadespussercats wrote:
Seth wrote:
hadespussercats wrote:
Seth wrote:Are you really supporting the notion that a 15 year old can make rational, competent, healthy decisions about her sexuality or pregnancy without any parental oversight or consultation? Really? Have you ever had children?
Yet this girl would make a good parent? Good parenting does require rational, competent, healthy decision-making. But then, you might not be aware of that, since you've never had children.
A teenage mother is not axiomatically on her own in parenting her child, there are plenty of resources available both within the family and without, and it's my observation that in most cases, when a woman (including a teen-age woman) has a child, it has a substantial positive effect on focusing her attention on proper child care.

The notion that an abortion is the only or even the best answer to teenage pregnancy is nothing more than an ideological knee-jerk snap judgment that fails to look carefully at all the facts and circumstances.
Whether a teenaged girl could be a good mother or not is not the concern of parental consent laws.
It should be, since that's the concern of the parents as well.
Parents are not generally granted the right to force their daughter who wants to carry to term to have an abortion.


They should be. If they have the legal authority to consent to their daughter's desire for an abortion, the legal authority to force the child to have an abortion is implied in the same way that the legal authority to consent to a child having an appendectomy is equivalent to the legal authority to force the child to have an appendectomy against the child's wishes.

That's what parental authority is, the legal authority to make decisions regarding the best interests and health, safety and welfare of one's child, whether the child agrees or consents or not.
And the issue of notification and consent only arises when a daughter who is pregnant wants to terminate-- the parents' consent was not required for her to become pregnant (I am speaking de facto here-- I recognize your point that parents can forbid their minor children to have sex.


I'm sorry, but you can't use the argumentum ad populum ("everybody's doing it") fallacy as a valid argument against the legal right of a parent to either consent to or require a minor child to have an abortion. It's absolutely pertinent that a parent has the legal right to forbid and prevent, using any reasonable means, their minor child from having sex. And just as that legal authority exists on the part of the parent, so does the legal authority to consent to or force a child to have a necessary surgical procedure if it is in the best interest of the child. What the surgical procedure is is entirely irrelevant. If a parent can force a child to get braces, or have an appendix or tonsils out, or have cancer treatments or surgery on a broken leg, the parent can just as lawfully, morally and ethically require a minor child to have an abortion. There is no distinction whatever to be made between one type of medical procedure an another in that regard.
But many of those children still find a way, in a story as old as Adam-- literally.) Nor would their consent be required for their daughter to give birth-- even if they were four-square against the notion.
Fallacious argumentum ad populum.
The only time parental consent is an applicable issue is when a minor daughter wants to have an abortion and her parents want her to carry the pregnancy to term. It's a measure that's not about promoting healthy communication among family members-- it's about stopping abortions from happening.
That's your take on it, but that's not the only light in which the situation can be viewed. Not by half. Parents have a valid reason to prohibit a minor child from having an abortion on mental health grounds. There are legions of stories from women who have had abortions who have suffered severe mental illness as a result, and have publicly stated how much they regret making that decision. No small number of these women have committed suicide or become functionally disabled as a result, and I know one such woman, who had an abortion as a 15 year old, personally. She is now 40 and is still struggling with the aftereffects of that bad, bad decision. It's negatively affected her mental health and ability to function in society her whole life.

Abortion is not a harmless procedure like squeezing a zit or removing a mole, no matter how much Planned Parenthood propaganda someone may spout to the contrary. It can have very real, very harmful physical and mental effects that can be lifetime disabilities.

Childbirth, on the other hand, is an entirely natural, if painful and occasionally dangerous event, and it's rarely the childbirth itself that's harmful, it's usually the prospect and obligation of having to raise a child, and in so doing give up all those dreams and hopes for a responsibility-free young adulthood that are the motivation for having the abortion in the first place. The vast majority of abortions are not therapeutic or medically necessary, they are almost all convenience abortions undertaken to pander to the selfish personal desires of the imprudent and careless woman who does not wish to face the consequences of her sexual indiscretions and failure to make good judgments.

I have no quarrel with medically necessary abortions that are required to protect the life or long-term health of the mother or where a fetus is known to be fatally defective, but convenience abortions are just manifestations of the sort of selfish, self-involved, arrogant refusal to use good judgment and accept the consequences of the voluntary act of having sex that are destroying the moral fabric of the world.

Abortions may not be the only answer to teen pregnancy, and in certain cases abortion might not be the best choice for an individual. But that choice needs to belong to the individual in question. Parents don't own their daughters' bodies.
No, but they have legal control of them, particularly when it comes to medical procedures, which gives them the legal right to refuse to allow an unnecessary, dangerous and harmful medical procedure to be performed on their child.
You might point out again that parents can make the choice for their daughter to have her appendix removed. Could those parents choose for their daughter to have to keep that diseased appendix, though?


Yes, in some cases, such as adherents to Christian Science. It must be noted however that the right of parents to refuse necessary life-saving medical care for their children on a religious basis is very tenuous these days, which is something that I actually agree with. But it must be noted that neither pregnancy and carrying a child to term, or abortion are in the same class as a burst appendix. Neither is an immediate threat to the life of the child, and both are usually survivable and generally physically harmless if things go as planned.

So you cannot rationally compare either childbirth or abortion to a refusal to treat a burst appendix, which is a known medical life-and-death emergency where parents do not, and should not, have the choice to deny reasonable medical treatment for the child. It's an apples/oranges comparison.
Parents are stewards for their children, with enormous responsibilities that shift and change, and ultimately fade. Their rights over their children's autonomy have limits.
Of course there are limits, but either consenting to or mandating an abortion for a minor child is well within long-established parental authority. What, exactly, would distinguish between a requirement by a parent that a child submit to surgery for a burst appendix from a similar requirement that the child either have an abortion or not have an abortion? What's so special about the fact that the medical decision involved is about sex and reproduction that it would rationally or logically place the child's desires above the parental determination of what's best for that particular child?

I say it's not really about a rational distinction being drawn between parental control of one medical procedure or another, I say your argument is solely based in a political and philosophical objection to ANYONE having the power to control whether or not an abortion can be freely procured by ANY member of the female gender, no matter how young, old, competent or incompetent she may be. I see your argument as a continuation of the absolutist, no-compromise, no reason or rationality, mindless defense of the "right to abortion" that radical feminism insists is untouchable and beyond any review or regulation by society for any reason whatsoever.

And it is precisely this sort of absolutist, radical, feminist-fundamentalist refusal to acknowledge that there may be times when a woman (or girl) should NOT have a "right to abortion" that is utterly unfettered and not subject to any constraint or regulation that damages the legitimate arguments surrounding the abortion debate that abortion should be "safe, legal, and rare."

When abortion proponents refuse to acknowledge that abortions can be harmful and deadly and that therefore there is legitimate authority on the part of the government to regulate abortion as a part of it's inherent police powers, they marginalize themselves as irrational zealots who should be, and justifiably are, marginalized, rejected, and ignored.

Which makes Planned Parenthood (which is only in the abortion business for the money, no matter what anyone cares to say to the contrary), the chief purveyor of abortion-proponent lies, the chief enemy of everyone with reason and nuance of thought.

Not to mention the fact that it's a nationwide criminal enterprise that should be taken down and prosecuted under the RICO Act and various child-protection laws for illegally providing abortion services to minors in violation of many laws.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S

"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth

© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.

Seth
GrandMaster Zen Troll
Posts: 22077
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:02 am
Contact:

Re: Parental Consent for Tanning

Post by Seth » Thu Mar 01, 2012 12:41 am

hadespussercats wrote:
seth wrote: it's my observation that in most cases, when a woman (including a teen-age woman) has a child, it has a substantial positive effect on focusing her attention on proper child care.
You're saying most mothers are good mothers, in your experience? Or are you saying that getting women focused on child care instead of other interests or needs is positive and proper?
The latter, when one is a parent.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S

"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth

© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.

User avatar
Warren Dew
Posts: 3781
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 1:41 pm
Location: Somerville, MA, USA
Contact:

Re: Parental Consent for Tanning

Post by Warren Dew » Thu Mar 01, 2012 1:08 am

Seth wrote:
hadespussercats wrote:Parents are not generally granted the right to force their daughter who wants to carry to term to have an abortion.

They should be. If they have the legal authority to consent to their daughter's desire for an abortion, the legal authority to force the child to have an abortion is implied in the same way that the legal authority to consent to a child having an appendectomy is equivalent to the legal authority to force the child to have an appendectomy against the child's wishes.
At least you're consistent on this.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 22 guests