Abortion on demand huh?

[badbabysitter]

http://www.omaha.com/article/20131004/NEWS/131009292/1707

LINCOLN — The Nebraska Supreme Court on Friday refused a 16-year-old foster child's request to get an abortion without parental consent.

The court majority ruled that the girl, identified only as Anonymous 5, was not mature enough to make the decision herself.

But two judges, in a dissent, said Nebraska law leaves the girl without an avenue to get an abortion.

“The Legislature has assumed under (the law) that all minors will have a parent or guardian who can give consent,” Judge William Connolly wrote. “As this case illustrates, however, that is not always true.”

Connolly said the girl involved in the case does not have a parent or guardian to give consent for an abortion, other than the State Department of Health and Human Services.

But state regulations bar the department from either giving or withholding consent for a ward to get an abortion.

“She is in legal limbo — a quandary of the Legislature's making,” Connolly said.

The high court ruling was the first involving Nebraska's new parental consent law.

Passed last year, the law requires girls age 17 and younger to get written, notarized consent from a parent or guardian for an abortion. Previous state law required only that a parent be notified of a girl's plans for an abortion.

The new law allows girls to bypass the consent provision in medical emergencies, if they are victims of abuse or neglect or if they can convince a judge that they are mature and well-*informed enough to make the decision themselves.

The high court said the girl is not currently a victim of abuse, even though she was removed from her parents two years ago because of physical abuse and neglect. Her parents lost their parental rights earlier this year.

Catherine Mahern, the attorney representing the girl, said her client went before Douglas County District Judge Peter Bataillon in July. At the time, the girl was 10 weeks pregnant.

Mahern declined to say whether the girl is still pregnant, three months later. “It is not in my client's best interests to comment,” she said.

She noted there are ways for a minor to bypass parental consent other than through the courts. Among them is going to another state, she said.

Mahern said she believes the court ruling avoided some issues, including whether the district court judge demonstrated bias.

According to the Supreme Court ruling, Bataillon had asked the girl if she understood that “when you have the abortion it's going to kill the child inside you.”

The high court majority refused to rule on that issue, saying that it should have been raised in district court.

The high court also declined to consider whether the girl had a right to decide on an abortion without the consent of HHS, the agency which has legal responsibility for her.

Nor did it decide whether the law allows foster parents to act as the girl's guardians in granting consent for an abortion.

Suzanne Gage, a lobbyist for Americans United for Life, the group that pushed for the parental consent law, said the group's attorneys are studying the ruling.

Jill June, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of the Heartland, which provides abortion services in Omaha and Lincoln, called the ruling “concerning” because the court eliminated “a safe and legal option for a woman in a dire circumstance.”


.......................................


so the girl was removed from her parents because they physically abused her, she wanted to abort the child so she wouldnt be removed from foster care

but she's not mature enough to make her own decision

but somehow she is mature enough to be a teenage single mother

 

[CandiCame]

So their logic is literally, "You're not mature enough to make a decision about your body, therefore you should assume responsibility for a helpless infant that will literally die if you don't take of it properly."

I just want to make sure I understand that properly.

edit: take care of it properly^

 

[badbabysitter]

So their logic is literally, "You're not mature enough to make a decision about your body, therefore you should assume responsibility for a helpless infant that will literally die if you don't take of it properly."

I just want to make sure I understand that properly.

edit: take care of it properly^

pretty much

being a penniless single mother is much wiser then getting an abortion and finishing high school

 

[Balladeer08]

So their logic is literally, "You're not mature enough to make a decision about your body, therefore you should assume responsibility for a helpless infant that will literally die if you don't take of it properly."

I just want to make sure I understand that properly.

edit: take care of it properly^

I can't recall who said it, but "If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament." I have no doubt as to the truth of that statement. It always bothers me when people are not willing to grant to others rights they demand for themselves.

That said, there is another side to the coin.

I have never understood why the father of the child has no legal part in the decision over abortion, but is required to pay for that decision for 18+ years.

This does not seem fair to me either.

 

[CandiCame]

pretty much

being a penniless single mother is much wiser then getting an abortion and finishing high school

I...

how?

These are presumably adults making these decisions and not 12 year old, right? Like they have the ability to differentiate between complex issues rather than being stuck in Piaget's proverbial concrete development stage?

 

[badbabysitter]

I can't recall who said it, but "If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament." I have no doubt as to the truth of that statement. It always bothers me when people are not willing to grant to others rights they demand for themselves.

That said, there is another side to the coin.

I have never understood why the father of the child has no legal part in the decision over abortion, but is required to pay for that decision for 18+ years.

This does not seem fair to me either.

the mother is also required to pay for that decision for 18+ years, plus she gets the added benefit of carrying the child to term and all health related issues of doing so

once the father gets all those perks, then he can decided what he does with his pregnancy

and you may note, the father seems to have completely bowed out of the above situation all together

 

[CandiCame]

I can't recall who said it, but "If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament." I have no doubt as to the truth of that statement. It always bothers me when people are not willing to grant to others rights they demand for themselves.

That said, there is another side to the coin.

I have never understood why the father of the child has no legal part in the decision over abortion, but is required to pay for that decision for 18+ years.

This does not seem fair to me either.

You can sign your rights away at conception. That's the male version. You don't have to pay for the kid. Once you sign your rights away you're legally a stranger. You don't have to pay child support or anything.

There's a lot of fucked up shit about paternity rights (the mother can give the kid up for adoption without the father's consent; the 'family first' act makes it damn near impossible for the father to get custody, and so on and so on) but abortion isn't really one of them. Unless you count that you can't force someone to carry your child. But that's a total dick move and an unreasonable thing to expect. You can't hold someone hostage for almost a year because you want kids. I mean, ethically, you can't.

 

[badbabysitter]

I...

how?

These are presumably adults making these decisions and not 12 year old, right? Like they have the ability to differentiate between complex issues rather than being stuck in Piaget's proverbial concrete development stage?

It's a constant reminder to me of how grateful I am to live in Canada where morality doesnt trump reason

 

[Sean Renaud]

I can't recall who said it, but "If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament." I have no doubt as to the truth of that statement. It always bothers me when people are not willing to grant to others rights they demand for themselves.

That said, there is another side to the coin.

I have never understood why the father of the child has no legal part in the decision over abortion, but is required to pay for that decision for 18+ years.

This does not seem fair to me either.

It's not your body. A pregnancy isn't going to cause a man to take weeks or months off of work for example. I doubt any man ever in history has died in childbirth. Granted it's rare today but still quite possible. Guys also always have the option to simply walk away.

It's a constant reminder to me of how grateful I am to live in Canada where morality doesnt trump reason

I disagree. You simply have better morals than we do.

 

[CandiCame]

It's a constant reminder to me of how grateful I am to live in Canada where morality doesnt trump reason

It's not even moral tho. That's the thing. It's not moral at all. Not even in a religious sense. I never got how Christians claim that their god is anti-abortion, we're talking about a dude who literally gives a recipe for how to perform an abortion (though abortions should only be done by a trained priest) in Numbers 5:15-31.

It's pretty nasty too. It's like, barley and floor dirt.

 

[Balladeer08]

the mother is also required to pay for that decision for 18+ years, plus she gets the added benefit of carrying the child to term and all health related issues of doing so

once the father gets all those perks, then he can decided what he does with his pregnancy

and you may note, the father seems to have completely bowed out of the above situation all together

I wasn't referring to the above situation, just the rule of law in general.

Since the mother gets 100% of the decision making, why shouldn't she get 100% of the expenses?

In what other situation is anyone required to pay half to cost of anything for 18+ years?

How about if I decide to buy a luxury motor home, and require you to pay for half of it? That would be bullshit, right? It damn sure would be if someone required me to pay for half the cost of a vehicle I don't want, don't get to choose, etc.

The abotion laws do not seem fair and equal. It is a difficult problem. How about some creative problem solving?

Perhaps "pregnancy insurance" for young men. If they knock someone up, the insurance pays for it. And, of course, their premiums go up or they get cancelled. Uninsured males, by making the decision not to get insurance, have therefor decided to take the risk.

For that matter, why not pregnancy insurance for young women? For unintended pregnancies, which for purposes of the policy would be considered pregnancies out of wedlock.

There, equality.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Okay you can cite the verse there Candi.

 

[CandiCame]

It's not your body. A pregnancy isn't going to cause a man to take weeks or months off of work for example. I doubt any man ever in history has died in childbirth. Granted it's rare today but still quite possible. Guys also always have the option to simply walk away.



I disagree. You simply have better morals than we do.

It legit should tho. Paternity leave should be a thing. Do you know how fucked up it is that in the states we don't have time to bond with our kids? In Europe dad's get a year off and free parenting classes and all kinds of shit. And that year off- is paid. Meanwhile, in the states, I'm looking for a third job so I expect I'll get to spend some time with Zadie when she gets back from fucking prom.

 

[badbabysitter]

It's not even moral tho. That's the thing. It's not moral at all. Not even in a religious sense. I never got how Christians claim that their god is anti-abortion, we're talking about a dude who literally gives a recipe for how to perform an abortion (though abortions should only be done by a trained priest) in Numbers 5:15-31.

It's pretty nasty too. It's like, barley and floor dirt.

People only read the passages of their holy books that concur with their sensibilities

 

[Sean Renaud]

I wasn't referring to the above situation, just the rule of law in general.

Since the mother gets 100% of the decision making, why shouldn't she get 100% of the expenses?

In what other situation is anyone required to pay half to cost of anything for 18+ years?

How about if I decide to buy a luxury motor home, and require you to pay for half of it? That would be bullshit, right? It damn sure would be if someone required me to pay for half the cost of a vehicle I don't want, don't get to choose, etc.

The abotion laws do not seem fair and equal. It is a difficult problem. How about some creative problem solving?

Perhaps "pregnancy insurance" for young men. If they knock someone up, the insurance pays for it. And, of course, their premiums go up or they get cancelled. Uninsured males, by making the decision not to get insurance, have therefor decided to take the risk.

For that matter, why not pregnancy insurance for young women? For unintended pregnancies, which for purposes of the policy would be considered pregnancies out of wedlock.

There, equality.

No, that would actually be insanity. If you agreed to pay half of a vehicle then you should pay it until it's done unless you are released from your obligation.

As for the rest of your idea the situation is mostly fair, it's not perfect but the situation isn't equal either.

 

[CandiCame]

I wasn't referring to the above situation, just the rule of law in general.

Since the mother gets 100% of the decision making, why shouldn't she get 100% of the expenses?

In what other situation is anyone required to pay half to cost of anything for 18+ years?

How about if I decide to buy a luxury motor home, and require you to pay for half of it? That would be bullshit, right? It damn sure would be if someone required me to pay for half the cost of a vehicle I don't want, don't get to choose, etc.

The abotion laws do not seem fair and equal. It is a difficult problem. How about some creative problem solving?

Perhaps "pregnancy insurance" for young men. If they knock someone up, the insurance pays for it. And, of course, their premiums go up or they get cancelled. Uninsured males, by making the decision not to get insurance, have therefor decided to take the risk.

For that matter, why not pregnancy insurance for young women? For unintended pregnancies, which for purposes of the policy would be considered pregnancies out of wedlock.

There, equality.

Medical insurance already works that way. If you have health insurance and you get somebody pregnant the pregnancy is covered under your insurance. Do you know how much it costs to have a baby in a hospital? To go through all that shit? And the precare? Not to mention the emergency room visits when she wakes up in the middle of the night and thinks that she's dying- because I do. Without KCHIP we would be royally fucked. Pregnancy and children are expensive. No one is asking the mother to cover 100% of the costs- that's the entire point of child support. Where do you live where that's the case? Because that's strait up fucked up.

 

[Sean Renaud]

It legit should tho. Paternity leave should be a thing. Do you know how fucked up it is that in the states we don't have time to bond with our kids? In Europe dad's get a year off and free parenting classes and all kinds of shit. And that year off- is paid. Meanwhile, in the states, I'm looking for a third job so I expect I'll get to spend some time with Zadie when she gets back from fucking prom.

I'm American enough to say that's your own damn fault for not waiting until you were financially better off to have a child. If Bri is again abortion there is always adoption. If you have to pick up a third job then you fucked up. Bad.

When men can breast feed they'll rate paternity leave. Until then it's an indulgence that we grant if and when we can.

 

[Balladeer08]

You can sign your rights away at conception. That's the male version. You don't have to pay for the kid. Once you sign your rights away you're legally a stranger. You don't have to pay child support or anything.

There's a lot of fucked up shit about paternity rights (the mother can give the kid up for adoption without the father's consent; the 'family first' act makes it damn near impossible for the father to get custody, and so on and so on) but abortion isn't really one of them. Unless you count that you can't force someone to carry your child. But that's a total dick move and an unreasonable thing to expect. You can't hold someone hostage for almost a year because you want kids. I mean, ethically, you can't.

Signing rights away is not 100%. There are cases where anonymous sperm donors have been made to pay for a child from a woman they've never met. Because the welfare of the child is the court's first concern.

I totally agree there is a lot of fucked up shit about paternity rights. If the mother wants to give the child up, the father should have first shot at custody. Not all will want it, but for those who do, how do you justify freezing them out? Is denying fathers a family value? Sounds like a damn odd one.

Holding someone hostage, no. But there are people who pay surrogate mothers to carry the babies. Why not do that? Or require the father to pay the mother the surrogate fee if she is then willing to carry the baby to term?

 

[CandiCame]

Okay you can cite the verse there Candi.

You mean it's weird that I know, offhand, the god's recipie for abortion part?

...because it's legit not like we tried it or anything. If anything it's probably got as much scientific merit as that one dude who got animals with stripes by making them fuck while they looked at striped sticks. Not a good book to get science from.

 

[Balladeer08]

No, that would actually be insanity. If you agreed to pay half of a vehicle then you should pay it until it's done unless you are released from your obligation.

As for the rest of your idea the situation is mostly fair, it's not perfect but the situation isn't equal either.

I don't think you read that too carefully. Nobody said anything about the other person agreeing to pay for half of the vehicle. No contract exists. It is a case of one being forced upon an unwilling party.

 

[badbabysitter]

I wasn't referring to the above situation, just the rule of law in general.

Since the mother gets 100% of the decision making, why shouldn't she get 100% of the expenses?

In what other situation is anyone required to pay half to cost of anything for 18+ years?

How about if I decide to buy a luxury motor home, and require you to pay for half of it? That would be bullshit, right? It damn sure would be if someone required me to pay for half the cost of a vehicle I don't want, don't get to choose, etc.

The abotion laws do not seem fair and equal. It is a difficult problem. How about some creative problem solving?

Perhaps "pregnancy insurance" for young men. If they knock someone up, the insurance pays for it. And, of course, their premiums go up or they get cancelled. Uninsured males, by making the decision not to get insurance, have therefor decided to take the risk.

For that matter, why not pregnancy insurance for young women? For unintended pregnancies, which for purposes of the policy would be considered pregnancies out of wedlock.

There, equality.

More mothers then you think get 100% of the financial responsibilities.. have you ever looked at the stats of single parents, guess which gender carries most of the weight?


if both parents were required to do so, you would have a valid point, but a father can legally sign off on rights...otherwise no one would ever go to a sperm bank

as for you motor home analogy.. you can sell a motor home at any time and make your money back.. you really shouldnt sell a child

the abortion laws are not equal, because men physically can't have them... if men could get pregnant and I found out the mothers were trying to dictate what he could do with his body, I would be outraged

 

[Balladeer08]

Medical insurance already works that way. If you have health insurance and you get somebody pregnant the pregnancy is covered under your insurance. Do you know how much it costs to have a baby in a hospital? To go through all that shit? And the precare? Not to mention the emergency room visits when she wakes up in the middle of the night and thinks that she's dying- because I do. Without KCHIP we would be royally fucked. Pregnancy and children are expensive. No one is asking the mother to cover 100% of the costs- that's the entire point of child support. Where do you live where that's the case? Because that's strait up fucked up.

I raised three sons. I'm pretty sure I know it chapter and verse.

And again, you didn't read carefully. My point is that the father shouldn't be forced to pay 50% for a decision he has no legal part in. Why shouldn't the person who makes 100% of the decision pay 100% of the cost?

Has health insurance changed so that it will cover a pregnancy of a non-spouse? I hadn't heard that, if it is so. I'd rate that as progress.

 

[Sean Renaud]

You mean it's weird that I know, offhand, the god's recipie for abortion part?

...because it's legit not like we tried it or anything. If anything it's probably got as much scientific merit as that one dude who got animals with stripes by making them fuck while they looked at striped sticks. Not a good book to get science from.

I just want to know what it is. You claimed the Bible has an abortion recipe I wanna see it.

I don't think you read that too carefully. Nobody said anything about the other person agreeing to pay for half of the vehicle. No contract exists. It is a case of one being forced upon an unwilling party.

You weren't an unwilling party. The moment you stuffed your dick in a woman you were a fully willing participant unless you can prove it was rape.

 

[CandiCame]

I'm American enough to say that's your own damn fault for not waiting until you were financially better off to have a child. If Bri is again abortion there is always adoption. If you have to pick up a third job then you fucked up. Bad.

When men can breast feed they'll rate paternity leave. Until then it's an indulgence that we grant if and when we can.

Yeah... that abortion thing was absolutely NOT going to happen. I am looking for another job, tho. I want to be able to move faster- I don't want that kid picking up any stupid redneck traits from this stupid, redneck town, and I don't want Bri working (which is another fight about how I'm a controlling asshole- which we've had a lot of lately) because the stress is bad for the fetus. And I was all for adoption, but now I'm attached to it. Kinda like how I get a lot of my animals because I'm fostering and then just can't give them back. Which is selfish as fuck. "I want this baby even if it'd be better off somewhere else". So now I'm going to work my ass off to make sure it's better off here. Because that's my only option at this point.

But the whole paternity leave thing- mothers don't get that to breast feed; in fact, in Ky, you breast pump at work, because we're efficient like that- it's to give the parent that time to bond with the child. It takes a human baby three months to imprint so that's the amount of maternity leave you get. If you can take that much. It's unpaid so most people can't.

...For me, personally, I'm horrified that I ever asked, "So are we gonna keep it" because she threw such a bitch fit. I'm terrified that in like five years I'm gonna be like, "Hey, Zade, how ya doing baby?"

And she's gonna be like, "I HATE YOU, MOM TOLD ME YOU WANTED TO KILL ME!"

Because I am dating a total bitch. So I worry about shit like that.

 

[CandiCame]

I raised three sons. I'm pretty sure I know it chapter and verse.

And again, you didn't read carefully. My point is that the father shouldn't be forced to pay 50% for a decision he has no legal part in. Why shouldn't the person who makes 100% of the decision pay 100% of the cost?

Has health insurance changed so that it will cover a pregnancy of a non-spouse? I hadn't heard that, if it is so. I'd rate that as progress.

Yeah. Any pregnancy that you can prove DNA or legal connection to insurance companies are forced to cover. A lot of companies will help with adoption costs now too.