Tuesday, November 24, 2009 East Central Illinois

Notification not yet the law in Illinois

Thursday November 5, 2009
 

Parents can still be shut out of the process if their minor child seeks an abortion.

Illinois' parental notification law, passed in 1995 when Jim Edgar was the governor, was expected to go into effect this week. But the courts have intervened yet again.

The legislation requires that the parents of an underage girl seeking an abortion be notified before the medical procedure is performed.

The minor does not need the parental consent, but it seems not only common sense but common decency that parents be brought into the picture when a child is considering such a monumental decision.

After all, parental consent is required for the most routine of medical procedures performed on a minor. Why shouldn't parents be at least notified when the procedure is major in both a moral and physical sense?

Sensible people must be wondering how it is that the legislation properly passed has yet to take effect. What happened is a continuing judicial scandal.

The Illinois Supreme Court, for reasons that make no sense, refused to write the rules under which a minor could seek a waiver from notification. The legislation allows a judge to suspend the notification requirement if the minor was a victim of abuse or neglect or can show she is mature enough to make the decision on her own.

Since the high court wouldn't do what it was supposed to do, the law never took effect. That changed when DuPage County State's Attorney Joseph Birkett asked the court to reconsider. It did so in 2006.

The legislation was delayed again when a federal judge in Chicago blocked it on constitutional grounds from taking effect. That order was unanimously overturned in July by a federal court of appeals.

The law was expected to take effect Wednesday, but the courts intervened for the third time when a state judge in Chicago put the law on hold again.

It's hard to understand the courts' actions. More than 30 states have similar laws.

Further, it is no impediment to a young person seeking to exercise her constitutional right to obtain an abortion. Some parents, no doubt, might suggest that an abortion is not appropriate, but others would just as certainly be supportive. Whatever their advice, it remains the minor's decision.

There is no question that this is a highly emotional issue, but the Legislature spoke and it is past time for the law to go into effect.

Comments

Since when has common sense stood in the way of appeasing the liberal religion of abortion?

Yes, it's about 14 years late.

Better late than never.

Ironically, I should support abortion porcedures because abortion's political supporters are promoting the killing of future pro-abortion voters, one vacuumed baby at a time.

-- Joe

Posted by JoeSixpack on November 5, 2009 at 10:52 AM Suggest Removal

Religion? Where do you get this stuff Joe? At one of those zealot sites you frequent?

Whether you support abortion or not, you are a very sick boy.

Posted by BillD on November 5, 2009 at 11:36 AM Suggest Removal

I can't fathom any doctor would treat a minor without consent of a guardian.

Without the consent of gurardian there could be a complete lack of medical history that could cost a girl their life should such a thing take place. Is the pro-choice community willing to put a girls health/life at risk, even though they use this as a reason keep abortion legal?

Does this bill mandate followup to ensure the girl and baby are not beaten?

I can't believe there are no protections for a girls right to have a child should the parent attempt to force the girl to have an abortion. Especially when this could be an attempt to hide rape.

Posted by aantulov on November 12, 2009 at 4:43 AM Suggest Removal

Add a Comment

Create an account

I forgot my password

Champaign, IL, Weather

  • Tonight
     Low: 41°
  • Tomorrow
     High: 50°

Rain
Advertisement