Part I: Charles T. Canady; Part II: Eileen Roberts

The authors of the following two-part viewpoint contend that parental consent laws, which require the notification or consent of a girl’s parents before she can have an abortion, are necessary. These authors also support the proposed Child Custody Protection Act, which would strengthen parental involvement laws by making it illegal to transport minors across state lines to evade consent laws in their own states. In Part I, Florida representative Charles T. Canady argues that parents are legally responsible for their child’s health and therefore have a right to know if their daughter is planning to have an abortion. In Part II, Eileen Roberts, founder of Mothers Against Minors’ Abortions, recounts the physical and emotional problems her daughter faced after obtaining an abortion that Roberts had not consented to.

As you read, consider the following questions:

1. What option is available for teens who want to have an abortion but are afraid to tell their parents, according to Canady"
2. What kinds of health problems did Roberts’s daughter encounter after having an abortion, according to the author"

I

This morning [May 27, 1999], the Subcommittee on the Constitution convenes to hear testimony concerning H.R. 1218: The Child Custody Protection Act. The Child Custody Protection Act (CCPA) is designed to address the problem of people transporting minor girls across state lines to circumvent parental notification and consent laws.

Across this country, a child can’t even be given an aspirin at school without her parent’s permission. It is not surprising, then, that many states have decided that a serious surgical procedure like abortion should also involve the child’s parents, or in some cases, a judge.

Disregard of Consent Laws

In fact, over twenty states currently enforce laws that require the consent or notification of at least one parent, or court authorization, before a minor can obtain an abortion. Yet, despite court approval of and overwhelming public support for these laws, vulnerable young girls are taken from their families to out-of-state abortion clinics in flagrant disregard of the legal protections the states have provided.

Indeed, studies conducted in various states demonstrate an unmistakable correlation between the number of girls seeking abortions out of state and the existence of parental consent and/or notification laws in the girls’ home states. Moreover, in states requiring parental consent or notification, abortion counselors often circumvent the law by referring girls to out-of-state clinics which advertise in neighboring states that they do not require parental consent or a waiting period.

This scenario fosters hasty and ill-advised decisions in which confused, frightened young girls are coerced into having abortions by those who may not have the girls’ best interest in mind. This is particularly disturbing given the fact that the majority of teenage pregnancies are caused by adult men who obviously have a great incentive to avoid criminal liability for their misconduct.

When parents are not involved in the abortion decisions of a child, the risks to the child’s health significantly increases. Only parents have knowledge of their daughter’s prior medical and psychological history, and would, for instance, be able to alert the abortionist of allergies to anesthesia and medication and provide authorization for the release of pertinent data from family physicians. When a pregnant girl is taken across state lines by a stranger for an abortion, none of these precautions can be taken. The Child Custody Protection Act will simply ensure the effectiveness of state laws designed to provide a layer of protection against these dangers to children’s health and safety.

Abortion activists say taking girls out of state is the only option when the girls are afraid to tell their parents about their pregnancy, but this ignores the judicial bypass option that is available for just this type of situation. [This option allows minors seeking abortions to obtain consent from a judge if they are unable to tell their parents.]

The Need to Regulate Commerce

Congress has a persuasive interest in exercising its constitutional responsibility to regulate commerce. Should abortionists in Connecticut have the right to lure girls from Massachusetts to the Nutmeg State so that they can evade the supervision and counsel of their mothers? In Nevada there are whores who, unlike the whores in other states, perform legally. Should entrepreneurs in Utah be free to take minors across the line to learn a new profession? We have a federal law that prohibits this. Why is a different principle involved where abortion is concerned"

William F. Buckley Jr., National Review, August 30, 1999.

Abortion activists also like to claim that it is simply a loving aunt or grandmother who takes the girl for the secret out-of-state abortion, when their own study—conducted in 1992 by the Alan Guttmacher Institute—shows that in a majority of cases it is not a family member who accompanies the girl for an abortion without the knowledge of her parents.

Moreover, states are free to craft their parental notification and consent laws to provide that notification or consent of a grandmother or other close adult relative is sufficient to permit a minor to have an abortion without parental involvement, and such statutes would not be covered by CCPA. Most states have not, however, chosen to allow grandmothers and other close relatives to act as surrogates for parents in the abortion context. If the minor’s circumstances are such that parental involvement is not possible, the grandmother or other close relative is free to assist the minor in pursuing a judicial bypass procedure. Such relatives should follow the law, not take the minor out of State to circumvent the law.

In light of the widespread practice of circumventing state parental involvement laws by transporting minors across state lines, it is entirely appropriate for Congress, with its exclusive constitutional authority to regulate interstate commerce, to enact the Child Custody Protection Act. The safety of young girls and the rights of parents demand no less.

II

My name is Eileen Roberts. I am the founder of an organization called MAMA, which stands for Mothers Against Minors’ Abortions. This organization was formed to serve as a collective voice for others also seeking to restore the rights of parents to be involved when their minor aged daughter seeks an abortion, whether in their community or for those who are taken across state lines without their knowledge or consent.

More significant, however, is the fact that I am the mother of a daughter who at age 14 underwent an abortion without my knowledge.

At age 13, the close relationship I had with my daughter was interrupted by a period of her rebelling, which included a relationship with a boy, which I knew was not in her best interest. My daughter refused my request not to see him but I continued to unconditionally love and care for her to the best of my ability, through this difficult time.

During my daughter’s rebellion towards our parental authority, my daughter was encouraged by her boyfriend, with the assistance of an adult friend, to obtain a secret abortion without my knowledge. This adult friend drove my daughter to the abortion clinic, 45 miles away from our home and even paid for my daughter’s abortion.

Wondering why my daughter had become depressed over the next two weeks, my husband and I thought perhaps her boyfriend had introduced her to drugs, so we searched for answers. Words cannot adequately communicate the Orwellian nightmare of discovering that your child had undergone an abortion, from a questionnaire we found under her pillow, which she failed to return to the abortion clinic.

As a result of her depression, my daughter was hospitalized, at which time it was discovered that the abortion had been incompletely performed and required surgery to repair the damage done by the abortionist. I was called and was told that my daughter could not have this reparative surgery without a signed consent form.

The following year my daughter developed an infection and was diagnosed as having pelvic inflammatory disease, which again required a two day hospitalization for IV antibiotic therapy and requiring a signed consent form.

To add insult to injury, my husband and I were responsible for our daughter’s medical costs which amounted to over $27,000.

Why People Evade Consent Laws

Iam here today to ask this [congressional] committee to reject the eccentric notion that any adult stranger has the right to abduct our minor aged daughters and take them to another state for a secret abortion. I speak today for those parents I know around the country, whose daughters have been taken out of state for their abortions. Many times these attempts to evade parental notification and consent laws are also attempts to conceal criminal activity, such as statutory rape. Certainly if a child is raped, a parent should know about it so this criminal can be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Iam horrified that our daughters are being dumped on our driveways after they are seized from our care, made to skip school, lie, and deceive their parents to be transported across state lines, whether it be two miles or 100 miles away. Where are these strangers when the emotional and physical repercussions occur? They are driving away to once again seize and transport other teens for secret abortions, and thus the malicious activity occurs again and again. Besides, strangers are not responsible for the financial or emotional costs that occur with secret abortions—parents are.

Iam reminded of the child from New York whose parents were notified in time to make funeral arrangements. Mrs. Ruth Ravenella shared with me and The Senate Education and Health Committee in Richmond, Virginia, that she sat in the hospital for three weeks before her daughter died with her hand over her mouth to help keep herself from screaming.

Restoring Family Dignity

Iam aware and concerned for the many teens who are truly from abusive homes, who are snatched away, given a secret abortion and then sent back to the abuser. This activity is contrary to the laws of this country. These girls need to be removed from such an abusive environment and the family encouraged to seek professional counseling.

Please allow parents the opportunity to put their arms around their daughters and say, “I love you, we can work this through together,” which parental notification and consent laws restore and this legislation will protect.

In conclusion, what has happened to my family, has happened that cannot be changed, however, by supporting and passing the “Child Custody Protection Act,” parental notification and consent laws will be secured and I can say with confidence that our young adolescent daughters will be protected and family dignity will be restored.