Are We Abandoning Our Teens?
By Stormy
Throughout the past four-and-a-half years, pro-choice women and men have been fighting what seems like a losing battle to safeguard women’s reproductive rights. The Bush administration has succeeded in significantly cutting the health care benefits that protect women and minorities and has also been chipping away at the 1973 landmark Supreme Court case (Roe v. Wade) that guaranteed women’s right to abortion. One such attempt by the administration and Congressional conservatives is circulating in Congress right now—the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act. This act would make criminals of anyone other than a parent or legal guardian who assists a minor (someone under age 18) in crossing state lines to have an abortion if the minor has not met her home state’s requirements for abortion. Several organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), National Organization of Women (NOW), National Abortion Federation (NAF), Choice USA, and many more, have come out in strong opposition to the Act.
Research shows that between 750,000 to 850,000 teenage women get pregnant each year [1]. The United States has the highest teen pregnancy rate among industrialized nations [1]. This is not a problem that affects only teenage girls either; one in every 15 American males becomes a father while still a teenager [2]. If this Act passes, the government will be telling young people who is acceptable to talk and turn to and who is not. Then, too, fear of criminal prosecution may make more adults shy away from helping a young woman in their family or community.
Studies show that the younger a teenager is, the more likely she is to tell a parent about her pregnancy [3]. Indeed, 90 percent of teens ages fourteen or younger report that at least one of their parents knew of their pregnancy and their decision [3]. In cases where a parent does not know, there are usually good reasons. Most young women who do not tell their parents say it is because they have already been the victims of family violence—physical, emotional, and/or sexual [3]. In fact, the ACLU reported one case in which 13-year-old Spring Adams was shot to death by her father after he learned that she was pregnant [4]. Another interesting fact, from the ACLU website, is that “The same percentage of minors inform their parents about their intent to have an abortion in states with and without laws restricting teens’ access to abortion”[4].
The people fighting for this Act are not fighting for young women; they are fighting against them. And who will be affected by this bill? Certainly not the mostly white, middle-aged, upper class males who will vote on it. Are these people thinking of their children and grandchildren? Obviously not. According to recent statistics, 86 percent of U.S. counties do not offer abortion services [5]. If 86 percent of U.S. counties do not provide abortion services, how can we expect women under age 18 to gain access to abortions they need and want unless a large number travel away from home and sometimes out of state for health care? Not only would this Act place many young women in danger—due to travel and delays or to unwanted pregnancy and childbirth, but also it would threaten with prosecution any adult who helps these young women to receive health care services. This is wrong! Anti-choice members of Congress are attempting to impose their personal moral and values on the youngest women of reproductive age.
Taking a closer look, there are also some Constitutional issues at stake. First, the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act would force all states to comply with the abortion restrictions of another state. Yet, according to the Supreme Court case Saenz v. Roe "[A] citizen of one state who travels in other States, intending to return home at the end of his journey, is entitled to enjoy 'Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States' that he visits." Further, this court decision was upheld regarding abortion laws in the case of Doe v. Bolton. In Doe v. Bolton, the Supreme Court ruled that "because the Privileges and Immunities Clause 'protects persons who enter [other states] seeking medical services that are available there," a state must make abortions available to visitors on the same legal terms under which it makes them available to residents.
Second, the Act would subject young women to government-mandated harm in several different ways. By not allowing any adult other than a parent or guardian to travel with a minor who needs an abortion, the Act would force young women who cannot or will not confide in a parent to travel long distances alone and unaccompanied. Both the travel and her traveling alone could offer serious danger to a pregnant minor. Then, too, if she wants another adult to travel with her, she may be one of the many young women for whom telling her parents is dangerous. Provisions of the Constitution prohibit the government from attempting to deter a constitutionally protected act by increasing the danger of the act. Yet, this is exactly what the government wants to do.
Finally, this Act has no language allowing for medical exceptions. This is another blatant violation of women’s rights. In Planned Parenthood v. Casey the Supreme Court held that all abortion regulations must contain a valid medical emergency exception, "[F]or the essential holding of Roe v. Wade forbids a state from interfering with a woman's choice to undergo an abortion procedure if continuing her pregnancy would constitute a threat to her health." In Stenberg v. Carhart the Supreme Court upheld its previous ruling stating that "[A]t a minimum an abortion restriction must contain an exception to protect a woman's health."
This Act threatens to violate many of the rights that are fundamental to women. I find it disheartening that many men and women do not seem to understand the critical importance to women’s human rights of being able to make the choice whether to carry a pregnancy to term. Our opponents seem to feel they must eliminate our control over our own bodies. As women, regardless of our age, we must come together and fight to sustain our rights, and we must welcome to our cause the many men who also see our right to choose as a critical human right. This is why we come together, in strong opposition to the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act and to other repressive actions by Congress and the administration. We must protect our rights and the rights of those who do not yet have a vote, American youth under age 18.
Please note: This Bill, known in Congress as the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act (HR 748), passed in the House of Representatives on April 27th, 2005. It is expected to reach the Senate this summer.
References:
- The Facts: Adolescent Pregnancy and Childbearing in the United States. Advocates for Youth. November, 2004. http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/factsheet/fsprechd.htm
- Teen Rights. Choice USA. http://www.choiceusa.org/facts/teenrights.php
- The Teen Endangerment Act: Harming Young Women Who Seek Abortions. The Center for Reproductive Rights. http://www.reproductiverights.org/pdf/pub_bp_tea.pdf
- ACLU Interested Persons Memo Opposing the Teen Abandonment Act (S.851/H.R.1755), called the "Child Custody Protection Act" by Its Sponsors. The American Civil Liberties Union. September 2004. http://www.aclu.org/ReproductiveRights/ReproductiveRights.cfm?ID=15882&c=223
- Abortion. Choice USA. http://www.choiceusa.org/facts/abortion.pdf
|
