Last week, Matthew Bailey lamented Alabama’s “insane parental consent law,” which requires parental consent for a minor to procure an abortion. Bailey argued that these laws would only serve to shame pregnant women and provide them with an undue burden should they choose to have an abortion.
Abortion is a medical operation not without its risks. Early abortions require mothers to ingest pills, often at home, that can cause painful and sometimes life-threatening complications. Similarly, abortions later in pregnancy are major surgical procedures that can require anesthesia and aren’t without risks. Laws requiring parental involvement in a daughter’s abortion decisions are sound public policy that protect the health and well-being of minors.
Specifically, this law will help protect minors by allowing parents to know what kind of medical attention and support their daughters will be receiving. Not knowing that his or her daughter has just undergone an abortion prevents a parent from helping her if she needs additional medical attention. Since parents often know their children’s medical history better than children themselves do, parents can provide valuable information to doctors, allowing them to exercise their best medical judgment. Additionally, this law helps parents know if their daughter has been a victim of sexual abuse. Without parental consent laws, sexual predators can manipulate or coerce their victims into getting an abortion and use the procedure as a cover-up for their crimes.
Both the American medical and legal systems recognize that minors possess varying degrees of rationality that prevent them from being able to make truly informed, autonomous choices. When a young woman is facing a decision like whether or not to get an abortion, she deserves the guidance and support of her parents. It’s both illogical and inconsistent for Alabama public policy to require a teenager to need parental permission to get a tattoo or use a tanning bed, or to receive their own medicine from a nurse at school, but not for an abortion.
Bailey complained that the state must spend money hiring experts to defend this law and argue on behalf of the developing human who is slated to be shredded and dismembered. The state hires experts to defend many laws, and while it may add up, it’s simply a part of our legal system. It is normal for laws to be challenged, and the state has a right to defend its laws as best as possible. The state has a clear legal interest in defending this law, since, according to Alabama state code, “the public policy of the State of Alabama is to protect life, born, and unborn.” The Supreme Court and lower federal courts have set a clear precedent on parental consent or notification laws, too: They are constitutional and, if they contain certain provisions, don’t place an undue burden on mothers.
Ultimately, this law treats minors not like criminals, but rather like minors. This law respects the role that parents have in the upbringing of their children and protects their daughters’ health and safety.
Joe Puchner is a sophomore studying mathematics. His column runs biweekly.
