The Redux Proposition - Proposition 4

One could arguably suggest that Proposition 11 also should qualify for this designation. The issue of whether a pregnant teenager should be required to seek parental consent to get an abortion has also been before the voters before.

For me this is a really simple issue. It is not about a woman's right to choose, although that is how California voters have chosen to interpret it when it was previously on the ballot. Under existing California law a teenager is required to get parental consent for almost any invasive medical procedure. This proposition would make the requirement for an abortion to be a constitutional mandate. I believe those kinds of mandates should be few and far between.

That could argue against the proposition. As you will see when I finally get around to discussing Proposition 8, that is an issue for me. But there is one difference. In 1987 the legislature adopted a requirement for parental notification, with proper safeguards. But that measure was challenged in the courts. The opponents argue an absolute right to abortion. And while I understand the choice arguments, I also believe that in these kinds of sensitive issues parents have an appropriate role. If a daughter broke her leg in a soccer game or faced some other medical procedure the physicians would be under an obligation to notify the parents.

The proposition has four outs that would allow a bypass of the requirement for a 1) Medical emergency, 2)if the parent has authorized a waiver, 3) if there is evidence of abuse or 4) if a court authorizes a waiver. Those provisions seem to offer flexibility.

The proponents argue that a teenager may be too embarrassed to tell her parents for any one of a number of reasons. In my opinion, that argument is bunk. The arguments on this proposition, which have been heard many times before, can be found on the folllowing link.

While I would normally vote against a constitutional provision, I believe the clear statement of legislative policy has been frustrated by the courts and thus this proposal is worthy of adoption. This is a close call but I would vote YES.