From CNS News:
Supreme Court Upholds Parental Notification Law
The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that a lower court was wrong to strike down New Hampshire’s parental notification law.
In a unanimous decision written by retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, the justices let the abortion restriction stand.
The case, Ayotte vs. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, challenged a New Hampshire law requiring girls under 18 to get a parent’s consent before having an abortion.
The New York Times
Supreme Court Steers Clear of First Abortion Case In 5 Years
The Supreme Court steered clear of a major ruling on abortion Wednesday, instead giving New Hampshire a chance to save its parental notification law.
Justices, in a rare unanimous abortion ruling, agreed that the New Hampshire law could make it too hard for some ill minors to get an abortion, but at the same time they were hesitant about stepping in to fix the statute. They told a lower court to reconsider whether the entire law is unconstitutional.
What we have is CNS News taking a postition that, "you know, maybe it is a good idea that parents be notified when their underage child wants a medical procedure" and the Times saying "CHOICE! PRIVACY!" Really, the Times tries for some sort of sympathy with their "ill minors." I guess they are ill if morning sickness counts. Or are they saying that pregnancy is an illness?
If someone’s child is busted for drinking in public, the parants must be notified if the child is under 18. Parents must be notified if their underage child is going to have any other medical procedure (except in certain emergency situations where the parents cannot be found.) Putting it a little simplistic, but, in almost every case, abortion is not a medical emergency, but an elective medical procedure. Do parents not have any Rights anymore?
