Proposition 73 in California - Abortions, a Minor's Privacy, and a Parent's Right to Know
Posted by Peerapong Tantamjarik
Here in California, it's that time of the year again... it's Special Election time! Where ordinary citizens, like you or me, or those with gobs of extra cash, can gather (or pay for) signatures and make a difference to the state by putting up for approval various propositions. Often times, these propositions can even amend our state Constitution. Proposition 73, currently on the November 8th, special election ballot, proposes to do just such a thing.
In a nutshell, Prop. 73 would amend Article 1 of the California Constitution to bar abortions for minors (under 18 years old) until 48 hours after a physician has notified the parent or legal guardian about the procedure (but parental consent is not required). Certain exceptions apply, such as medical emergencies, emancipated minors, married minors, and parental waiver of the waiting period. Also, a minor seeking an abortion can petition a juvenile court judge for a waiver of the requirement that the procedure is in her best interests. Official summary and text of Prop. 73 here. And here's another explanation and background of the proposal.
Set aside for a moment the possible ramifications of adding specific language regarding "unborn child" and a "child conceived but not yet born" directly into the state Constitution - from a privacy standpoint, Prop. 73 is very problematic for minors' interests (notwithstanding their inability to vote on the proposal).
Proponents argue that parental notification and consent is required for a litany of medical procedures, so abortions should not be the exception. Also, such a notification law would purportedly change teen behavior and result in fewer unwanted pregnancies and abortions.
Opponents counter that something as personal and serious as an abortion is something that minors don't want their parents to know about to the point that they will obtain illegal abortions to avoid such notice, and that whether a minor wants to inform her parents about an abortion is between her and her family, not for a physician (or state) to intrude. Also, opponents argue that Prop. 73 doesn't consider the safety of certain minors in abusive family relationships, where notification could have drastic repercussions.
Other aspects of Prop. 73 raise privacy issues. It requires physicians to report every abortion they perform on a minor to a state agency which would then compile and publish the data, without identifying either the minor or the physician. It also requires courts hearing minors' petitions for waiver to tally how many waiver petitions were received and granted, identifying the judges by name, and the state would make these numbers public. Civil penalties and civil liability applies to physicians who fail to provide adequate notice under Prop. 73.
No matter how you slice it, Prop. 73, if passed, would be an added intrusion on the privacy rights of minors (assuming you believe minors have such rights). The open question is whether that is an intrusion Californians find acceptable and strikes an appropriate balance between a child's private activities and a parent's right to know. We'll find out on November 8th.