The Huffington Post:

The House Judiciary Committee voted 20-13 on Tuesday to advance a bill that would make it a crime for anyone but a parent to accompany a young woman outside of her home state to have an abortion. The committee rejected several proposed amendments that would have provided exceptions for victims of rape or incest, women facing threats to their health, and grandparents and older siblings trying to accompany their family members to abortion clinics.

The Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act (CIANA), sponsored by Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), imposes a prison term of up to a year for a doctor who performs an abortion on an out-of-state minor that is not accompanied by a parent. It has 158 cosponsors in the House and a companion bill in the Senate.

“This legislation is based on common-sense,” Ros-Lehtinen said in a statement on Monday. “Parents have the right to be involved in their children’s lives.”

Opponents of the bill argue that it fails to consider the extenuating circumstances in which a teen would turn to another adult — such her grandmother or adult sister — for support, and could force young women to instead turn to unsafe alternatives to terminating her pregnancy.

“Today’s vote has exposed once again anti-choice lawmakers’ deep hostility to women’s rights and indifference to their health and well-being,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “While offering their usual disingenuous claims that they are acting to protect women, they have hypocritically rejected all attempts to add even the bare minimum of measures to safeguard vulnerable young women’s lives.”

The bill now moves to a full vote in the House.

At what point are these people going to stop?  I suppose the fake ID industry is going to start booming.  Seriously, do some of you legislators ever think of anything about abortion?  All the things wrong with this country that need fixing and we have a bunch of clowns in office that have OCD over abortion.

Stop it.  Stop it right now.  When kids don’t involve their parents, they usually have a darn good reason.   15 amendments were offered that attempted to make exceptions.

The committee rejected all of these proposed amendments.

  • It rejected amendments granting exemptions from the law for grandparents, clergy, and other trusted adults.
  • It rejected exceptions for survivors of rape or incest.
  • It rejected exceptions for health. The “Arrest Grandma” Act contains no exceptions for cases when a woman’s health is in danger.

 

  More war on women. 

 

26 Thoughts to “And yet another anti abortion bill….Congress this time”

  1. SlowpokeRodriguez

    Stop it.  Stop it right now.  When kids don’t involve their parents, they usually have a darn good reason.   

    Exactly, it’s called avoiding taking responsibility for one’s actions…and it is the cornerstone of liberal thought.

  2. marinm

    I don’t have an issue with this as I think a parent should be involved in the healthcare decisions of their minor children. If the minor child thinks differently they should legally separate themselves from the parent.

    1. Marin, each case is different. Most teens have told their mothers who oten accompany them. Not every one has that relationship though. Some have an older sister or Grandmother with them.

      Some girls have been impregnated by fathers, step fathers or brothers. Their mothers don’t always protect them. Its really best not to judge. If it were my granddaughter(s) and for some reason her mother wasn’t available to assist her with any medical procedure, I would just have to risk jail. Would I be going to federal prison? Would I get to stay in the grandmother suite?

      Does anyone know the names of those on the judiary committee who voted in favor of this horrible bill?

      It is bills like this that ensure I will never vote for a Republican again. I hope Frank Wolf votes NO.

  3. Slowpoke, that is really an Ahole statement. I am glad you have sons.

    From blisstree.com

    The bill is officially known as the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act and is sponsored by Florida Republican Ileana Ros-Lehtinen who says its goal is to protect the rights of parents to be “involved in their children’s lives.”

    Opponents of the measure are calling it the “Arrest Grandma” Act because it would make it illegal for a teen’s grandmother, aunt, friend or even boyfriend to take her to another state to get an abortion.

    Let’s examine everything that’s wrong with this:

    1. Not all teens live with their parents. It’s not uncommon today for a teen to be living with someone other than mom or dad, and there are a whole host of reasons for that, none of which should prevent a girl from being forced to reconnect with an estranged parent.

    2. The bill makes no provisions for rape or incest. What happens if dear-old dad was the one who got her pregnant in the first place? Or another relative and the parents refuse to acknowledge this is happening?

    3. What if the teen lives in a remote rural town where the nearest city and reputable abortion clinic is across the state border?

    4. What if the teen lives with her parents, but they are deadbeat parents? Meaning, they don’t care about her life and refuse to support her with the necessary financial resources and transportation to have an abortion?

    Like we have seen from a number of other anti-abortion bills lately, this is yet another example of one that claims to look out for the woman’s best interest, but in reality, it’s just another political move to try to secure votes.

    Not everyone is a good parent. Not everyone is even a so-so parent. In some cases, a cat is a better mother.

    Slowpoke, do you know any woman who was sexually abused by an adult when she was a child? I know 3. Go tell those women to tell their parents. Yea, right.

    Of course responsible parents should be involved and they usually are. But what of those who aren’t?

  4. marinm

    “Its really best not to judge.”

    I make no value judgment here and I understand and appreciate your position on this however if legally a minor is incapable of entering into an enforceable contract and as a society we don’t trust minors with unsupervised access to firearms or consumption of alcohol then I just can’t see allowing them to make a healthcare decision without their parents informed consent.

    Either they are minors or they are not.

  5. @Marin, there are some situations which are exceptions. Use of contraception is one area.

    Many states have parental notice and parental consent laws. However, in Virginia there is also a judicial by-pass where girls can go before a judge rather than involve a parent.

    This bill has no exceptions. I do not think it will pass. When I looked at the faces of those men who voted for this bill, I wanted to spit in their faces.

  6. marinm

    “@Marin, there are some situations which are exceptions. Use of contraception is one area. ”

    I don’t understand this part.

    “However, in Virginia there is also a judicial by-pass where girls can go before a judge rather than involve a parent. ”

    I have no issue with a child using existing law to sever themselves from their parents to make their own healthcare decisions and live apart from their parents.

    “I wanted to spit in their faces”

    I would not recommend this action as even if you don’t do it someone will claim you did and then call you and your cause ‘racist’. The media will also fail to ever report that it never actually happened.

  7. I have had much work related experience that doesn’t always involve human goodness. My first homebound job in PWC was out mid-county with a 14 year old pregnant girl. Abortion wasn’t legal then. I called the supervisor over chickens in the house. There were also 2 [ed note: correction: 2, not 23] men hanging about. One middle age, the other one younger. That is when I was told that they couldn’t figure out who impregnated her, her father or her brother.

    I never went back. I should have never been sent in the first place. It isn’t common but it also isn’t all that rare.

    Then there was the 8 year old whose mother was allowing her boy friends to do various sexual things to her daughter so they could watch.

    These are parents!!! You do realize such monsters exist, don’t you?

    Mrs. Louise Benton, the lady for whom Benton Middle School was named, rescued some of these kids and provided a home for them.

    http://bentonms.schools.pwcs.edu/modules/cms/pages.phtml?pageid=18278&sessionid=

  8. @marinm

    They were all white. Am I safe?

    Minors are allowed access to contraception. I believe it is federal law, one of those SCOTUS rulings after Griswold.

    I wouldn’t spit on someone but I would think about it.

    The judicial bypass is usually used by kids who don’t have available parents or else they feel they cannot approach their parents.

  9. marinm

    “These are parents!!! You do realize such monsters exist, don’t you? ”

    Yes. The ability to procreate doesn’t make one a good parent. But unless the State can prove that a parent is deficient and the minor is in danger than I side with the parent over the minor child.

    Existing laws allow for the State to step in and remove the minor in those horrible situations. But, lets be honest. The majority of people that will be impacted by this law aren’t in those horrible situations. They are bf/gf’s that go across state lines to get a medical procedure done.

    So, I think this law is fair in that existing laws allow for a safety valve to get minor children out of bad situations and minor children that wish to sever themselves can still petition the courts.

    1. Why is it that they go across state lines? Could it be that the services are simply inadequate in their state?

      No, the state doesn’t step in. What cloud have you been living on. Most kids by that time know how to survive since they don’t want to live on the streets. They also go to live with friends,an older sibling, aunts or grandparents.

      Not all kids who file for emancipation get it. Emancipation can end education. Kids have to have a way to support themselves.

      You take care of your little girl Marin. But you keep your laws you approve of off other people’s kids–kids who might not have protective parents. If you are that good of a parent then you probably will never run into having to even think about this law. Good parents’ kids never get knocked up. (NOT)

      I have seen too many kids in crappy situations to ever approve of this kind of stupidity. I feel like the war on women has now taken a new turn and is now a war on female teens also.)

      Furthermore, in case anyone doesn’t see what it is all about–anti choicers are poised and perched for Roe to be overturned. If that happens, New York and California will be the abortion meccas of the United States. If you have a commerce law that forbids everyone but parents, that just whittles away even more that those seeking abortion.

  10. No one has answered by question about ever talking to a woman who was sexually abused by a family member as a child. Want me to bring on online? I can do that.

  11. Elena

    Look, a young girl should not be forced to bear a child. The real issue is why would a teenager be afraid to tell her parents, because she would be forced to bear a child. In a perfect world teenagers would have the type of relationship that would allow for honest discussion, but we aint in a perfect world. I don’t believe you give up rights to your body because of age. Do I understand the concern of young girls being taken advantage of and not wanting to tell their parents, yes, but the blanket law that criminalizes this is troublesome to say the least.

  12. marinm

    Again. As a pro-lifer I am unmoved by your argument. I think existing laws offer enough of a safety valve to protect minors that require the State to intervene.

    For those minors that believe they don’t need their parents permission, experience or guidance then they can figure out how to live on their own with the courts permission.

    1. Tell that to the glover child.

      Perhaps you were sheltered from the seamier side of life growing up. If you don’t know about scum bags it is easy to look through rose colored glasses.

      When did you turn “pro-life” aka anti choice? I could swear you used to define yourself as pro choice.

      All of us are pro life. I am especially pro life about those walking around eating skittles. I worry more about human life on the hoof than in an embryonic state, I grant you.

  13. marinm

    errrgh!

    As a pro-CHOICER. Talk about a big error. hehe.

  14. SlowpokeRodriguez

    Moon-howler :
    No one has answered by question about ever talking to a woman who was sexually abused by a family member as a child. Want me to bring on online? I can do that.

    Oh, boy. My first girlfriend lived in Newville, PA (I was going to Shippensburg Univ. at the time). These towns are by the piedmont of the Appalachians. I know more than I care to about that topic. It wasn’t my girlfriend, but her older sister’s daughter (girlfriend’s niece).

    1. @Pokie, thanks for your answer. I expect you see where I am coming from then. Not every home is headed up by a responsible mother and father. To make these the only go-to people for every kid in America is an outrage.

  15. marinm

    “Tell that to the glover child.”

    If by this statement you’re saying the government sucks especially when it has to get into familial situations I would agree with you. But, throwing out Glover like that doesn’t do anything (to me) to help your case. The obstacle is still — if we treat minors as minors and don’t trust their judgment on something as minor as smoking a cigarette (health care decision) then how do we then trust them to make an informed decision re consent of an abortion procedure?

    Again I say. They’re either minors or they’re not. You tell me. Would you trust a minor with a handgun or alcohol? A cigarette? Voting? Working in the mines?

    Where is the line?

    1. I don’t believe the ban on cigarettes and alcohol for minors is because we don’t trust them. I think it is because we can control intake and use of a product. We have no laws forbidding them to go elsewhere to use these products. It really isn’t a good analogy.

      Let’s try again with this one. Sexual issues tend to ignore age of majority. Eisenstadt v. Baird in 1972 made it mandatory to allow single people the right to obtain contraception. On the other hand, do we want a bunch of pregnant teenagers? I say no. It makes far more sense to make contraception available.

      Abortion is treated differently and there is strong argument to treat it differently, simply because of the nature of abortion. It is classified as a surgical procedure. I am not going to get into the right or wrongness of parental consent/notification laws. Every one I know about has judicial by-pass involved. This law does not. Laws aren’t tailor made for each individual family. They are made for all families. Some families don’t have strong, responsible parents at the helm, at least mothers and fathers. Often the ‘parent’ is an aunt, uncle, grandparent. Some kids are in foster homes.

      Its a shame Congress has some time to spare so it can now start regulating teenagers. Glad they got the debt under control, energy solved, and the ob market jump started.

  16. Emma

    So minors can’t get contact lenses or even prescription glasses without parental consent, but we’re good with letting them get an abortion on their own. What a crazy world.

    And if Auntie or Grandma or family friend wants to take my teenage daughter across state lines, they had best damned sight be ready to pay for any and all medical expenses, including follow-up care and any complications that might ensue, and both they and the doctor had best be ready for me to sue the lights out of them if my child is harmed in the process.

    1. Interesting. I got my granddaughter glasses from start to finish. She never had parental permission. Should I expect a swat team to show up?

      I expect your daughter’s mother would be around to deal with whatever situation arose, so put the tough girl away. Not every kid has a responsible parent on the scene. In fact, far too many kids have parents with other things on the agenda other than parenthood. Some kids don’t even live with a parent. Some people don’t even know their parents or they only know one of them.

      A federal bill without any exceptions will never pass the test.

  17. @marinm

    I would say that the state is woefully lacking in this arena. It should be lacking. The state isn’t in the business of being a parent. It is a last ditch effort when mothers, fathers and families fail.

    As inadequate as the state is, there has to be a safety value for kids when things are really wrong in families.

  18. Emma

    @Moon-howler Understood. But don’t take away my parental rights because other people can’t handle their parental responsibilities. There has to be a way to handle this without (pardon the pun) throwing the baby away with the bathwater.

  19. Why does it need handling? We have had no laws like that for 39 years. Were your parental rights tampered with? The way I see it, if you and I are open, accessible parents who raise our kids to come to us with problems, we don’t have to worry about whether that law is in place or not.

    I would far rather Congress work on a texting while driving law. I think all of us are far more likely to have to worry about getting hit by a texting driver than an abortion seeking grandmother.

  20. Emma

    You’re giving the government power to decide who else in your life can make major medical decisions for your child. You can’t single-issue this. The implications would be vast. I see the law of unintended consequences here, and I would not be willing to cede my parental rights for a few people who can’t manage theirs.

Comments are closed.