Politix

Prev Next
Featured Quizzes
Politix Daily Headlines
Featured Debates
Issues

See all 17 issues

People
White House

See all people

ABORTION

Should It Be Illegal To Take Minors Across State Lines To Get Abortions?

Lawmaker wants to ban it

Next>

by David Mark

Editor-in-Chief t

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.)

Fights over social issues in Congress look to rage as strongly as ever. Legislation introduced by Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), would establish a ban on knowingly taking a minor across state lines with the intent of obtaining an abortion when such an action evades parental involvement laws in the minor's home state.

The Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act would also require those who perform the abortion on out-of-state minors to notify a parent of the minor at least 24 hours before the abortion will take place.

Supporters say the measure is necessary because underage females are often taken across state lines for abortions without parental knowledge - in circumvention of such laws in their home states. The minor females can be coerced by adults, including older boyfriends, who want to cover up unplanned pregnancies, according to Right Side News.

Critics contend such a law would isolate desperate underage females from the trusted adults in their lives and increase the chance they will resort to unsafe alternatives for termination of their pregnancies. Or delay the procedure, making it more dangerous.

The legislation isn't new. In 2005, the Republican-controlled House passed the measure with 270 votes. The then-GOP majority Senate passed a narrower version of the bill, 65-34. But it then fell three votes short of the 60 needed on a procedural vote on the House-passed bill.

Via POPVOX and Right Side News.

Like this article? B Vote Up
?

Would you support this legislation?

View results

Comments (view in Forum)

  • ST_Louie_Sue
    !
    Of course they are. What ever fits the liberal agenda. One minute a 13 year old is a child for their purposes and then for an abortion across state lines without parental consent they're a woman. Sick sick sick.
  • Zazziness
    !
    @ST_Louie_Sue Looks like conservatives once again want to block reality with a law; doesn't work. They want a pregnant teen who wants an abortion to sneak to a back alley worker who may or may not have medical training. Sick sick sick.
  • u
    tomincali
    !
    @Zazziness i will have to check yet think it is already illegal to take a minor across state lines unless it is your own kid. if anyone is fool ,enough to go in a back alley for an abortion let nature take its course. they said now the kid is an adult doing what you said would be a choice.
  • Fishbone345
    !
    @ST_Louie_Sue Oh get real! The age of consent in most Red States is 16. In Missouri, South Carolina and Iowa it's 14. So much for the Conservatives looking out for the best interests of children.
  • Zazziness
    !
    @tomincali "if anyone is fool ,enough to go in a back alley for an abortion let nature take its course..."
    Ah, the ever-compassionate conservative outlook. "Comply to my wishes. If you don't, you can die. I don't care."
  • View all 23 replies >
  • u
    DapperDave
    !
    Well, it won't stop the wealthy from protecting the image of their precious debutante daughters who happen to get knocked up. Long before abortion was made legal the wealthy were shipping their daughters across state lines and even out the country to terminate "inconvenient" pregnancies.
    It would, on the other hand, have an impact on those who can not afford to arrange for a "travelling" abortion.
  • Tralee
    !
    Operative word of your little fairy tale is PARENTS and THEIR DAUGHTERS. Got it? Not a stranger, a parent. This law is to protect minors from being taken across state lines by someone other than a parent for an abortion, could be the one who got her pregnant., ever thought of that? And, what's to stop some scumbag of a man who gets a 13 or 14 yr. old girl pregnant from doing it over and over each time he gets her pregnant?
  • marine1
    !
    ANYTHING that does not include the parents approval should be against the law and i believe that if one crosses a stae line to break a law, it becomes a federal offense. Even more strange is, you can't buy a gun across state lines but you can kill a unborn baby.
  • MarkJM
    !
    It's not an attack on women's right. They're minors. They shouldn't be forced across state lines for an abortion in ANY case. Whether by their parents, legal guardian, boyfriend, etc. If that juvenile female decides to have that child, that is her right. In the same respect, she should also be made to start paying her own way. No more mommy and daddy funding her, time to get a jobby-job to support that child and your own spending habits.

    Oh btw, on an unrelated note, for those who are paying attention, that minor in TX won the case against her parents (through settlement).
  • jamie91
    !
    Sorry voted you up by accident. The article is talking about adults helping a minor get an abortion they want, not forcing them to have an abortion.
  • falco_alba
    !
    They shouldn't have to go across state lines to get one. If that is what it has to happen then there's a bigger problem, isn't there?
  • jaybebo84
    !
    If it is an older boyfriend taking them....would it not constitute statutory rape? Nevertheless, abortion should be illegal...it is the killing of another human being...regardless of the age of the being...
  • Zazziness
    !
    How are you going to arrest Mother Nature? Quite a few pregnancies naturally abort in the first trimester. And did you know a whole lot of pregnancies are twins, early on? Usually the stronger fetus prevails and the parents never know there were once two zygotes. Will you be arresting a baby for murder if its twin doesn't make it out of the womb alive?
  • jaybebo84
    !
    @Zazziness

    LMAO...fetuses dying due to this method is selective based on nature...abortions this article are relating to are pre-meditated...not a natural selection...got to do better than this...
  • Zazziness
    !
    @jaybebo84 So one fetus can kill another in the womb and that's not murder? You need to think that through. Each is a full human being, according to you, so there is no reason to call it anything but murder, is there?
  • jaybebo84
    !
    @Zazziness

    Let me get this right...you want to say that a fetus pre-meditates its killing of another fetus in the womb? I do not believe a fetus has the cognitive ability to reason murder of another...
  • Zazziness
    !
    @jaybebo84 OK, don't call it premeditated murder.(Though we don't know what goes on in the mind of that fully-human fetus, do we?) Let's just call it manslaughter. Even so. you can't have it both ways. Either a zygote and fetus are NOT full human beings, in which case you have to stop calling women who choose to have abortions murderers. Or they ARE full human beings, in which case you have no choice but to charge one with murder if it does away with another fetus in the womb with it.
    I think, in reality, you do not think a fetus is a full human being. Otherwise you would not have admitted that it does not have the cognitive abilities of a full human being.
  • View all 11 replies >
  • DARSB
    !
    Looks almost coordinated, doesn't it.

    As GOP-lead states (like Mississippi) create more and more barriers to provider clinics, often forcing them to close, this sort of law further restricts the choices available to females facing difficult reproductive circumstances.
  • u
    AceLuby
    !
    That varies from state to state. Many states allow minors to consent to medical procedures w/out the parents knowledge/consent, including abortion, rehab, and emergency room cases, among many others.
  • AlexMIA
    !
    I voted not sure for lack of a better option. I think it is the woman's right to decide, not the parent's, but parents should not be taken out of the loop when it comes to minors.
  • u
    Realthinker
    !
    I agree. Laws that prevent teachers, coaches, and extended family members such as aunts, older cousins, etc from taking minors to have an abortion anywhere, either locally or accross a state line should be the goal. Liberals want abortion to be "personal" until it becomes a private family matter involving a minor. Then they want the state to butt in.
  • Arumizy
    !
    All though i am against abortion in all cases, this kind of baffles me. No medical treatment should be administered to a minor without parental consent. I do not care if it is a tonsillectomy, birth control or an abortion.
  • jessejaymes
    !
    After reading all the comments to this point, a couple of observations. 1.) the liberals and conservatives alike are easy to spot. Neither one has made a single rational defense of either side. Great jumping jehosaphat, "they will just go to back alleys and get abortions if they aren't allowed to go across state lines to get an abortions without parental permission". Talk about your scare tactics. Most minors wouldn't know how to find a back alley abortionist. Who are you? The NRA?

    2.) And the right wing objections hold no more water than the left. "it's illegal to take a minor across state lines". On what planet does is this law upheld? We allow minors to cross international borders and nobody is held responsible.

    3.) I would like to point out that in most states if a 20 year old is caught having sex with a minor he is branded for life as a pedophile and required to adhere to "sex predator laws" for the remainder of his days. He can be thrown in prison for being within 1,500 yards of a school. This is an assortment of laws supported by both the left and right. YET the left seems to think that the minor is only a minor when she has sex but not once she gets pregnant. That's outright hypocrisy. The right on the other hand seems to only care about the fetus and the poor minor carrying that fetus but once the baby is born and the mother can't take care of it, well then everyone concerned can just die. Forget that. OUTRIGHT Hyprocisy.

    4.) Make the morning after pill over the counter for 5.00 a pill. Problem solved.
  • AMSCountryboy
    !
    I dont know about other states but in PA and WV the legal age of consent is 16. So a 20,25,30 year old can have sex with a minor (16-17) and it be legal.

    I was never aware of a law saying that you cant take minors over state lines. To my knowledge you are right and it is not upheld... i honestly dont even think that law exists. When i was 18-19 i still had friends who were 16-17 and we were always taking trips to ohio or WV.

    The pill over the counter and for $5 is a GREAT idea. But would a minor be able to get it without a parent? Some parents freak out at the thought of their kids haaving sex. Because of that i could see why a pregnant 16 or 17 year old wouldnt even want to tell their parents.
  • u
    kyrebel
    !
    I'm sure a 20 year old guy would gladly take his 14 year old neighbor to get an abortion. Even though she thinks he loves her now that she is pregnant and he said he did too. The bright side is her parents will never know about the the pregnancy and he won't go to jail. The greatest thing too, he won't have to pay child support for 18 years.

    The parent should know and the abortion clinics should be required to tell them.
  • u
    callmecrazy
    !
    Yes, worst case scenario, you take the neighbors child to get an abortion without them knowing and she becomes one of the few who die...now what? Criminal charges? A civil lawsuit? I wouldn't do it, you'd have to be an idiot to drive someone else's kid across state lines for a medical procedure without their parent's consent.

    Also, why was the only yes answer available worded in such a manner? There are other reasons this is a bad idea than just the standard 'life is precious' answer. That almost made me not select yes. Was that the intent of wording it that way?
  • R Load more comments...