Facts on Parental Consent for Abortions

A minor facing an unplanned pregnancy has many decisions and choices to make, including whether or not to inform her parents. If she chooses to terminate her pregnancy, the choice of whether or not her parents will know about her condition may be determined by the state she lives in.

History

• Since abortion was affirmed as a right in 1973, states have needed to address how they were going to handle underage women seeking to terminate their pregnancies. The first state to enact parental involvement laws was Massachusetts, which chose to put into place parental consent shortly after the right of abortion was recognized.

Types

• Parental involvement laws take two forms. The most common is parental consent, which requires a minor to obtain her parent's or legal guardian's permission before she can have an abortion. In most states, this requirement can be bypassed either by a doctor or the judicial system. The other form of parental involvement law is parental notification, which requires that a parent or guardian be notified within 24 to 48 hours before the procedure. As with parental notification, this requirement can be bypassed in most states.

Geography

• As of September 2009, parental consent is required for a minor seeking an abortion in 19 states. In three states--Minnesota, Mississippi and North Dakota--both parents must consent. Parental notification, but not consent, is required in 13 states. Minors seeking abortions in the 15 remaining states and the District of Columbia are not required to have parental consent or parental notification.

Controversy

• Just like abortion itself, parental consent and parental notification laws are a hotbed of controversy. Proponents for parental consent and other parental involvement laws, cite parental rights and the welfare of the minors as the main arguments justifying the need for the laws. Other arguments in favor of the laws include religion, safety and possible legal issues, such as bringing a case of rape or statutory rape to light.

  Those who oppose the parental consent and other parental involvement laws also cite the welfare of the minor as the main crux of their arguments. In fact, the arguments both for and against the parental consent and parental involvement laws often use the same factors--welfare of the child, safety, possible legal issues and abortion trends--but from vastly different perspectives.

Expert Insight

• John Pinkerton, former Democratic senatorial candidate from California and proponent of parental consent and involvement laws, stated during his 1998 campaign, "Parents must give consent before their child can have their ears pierced or a tattoo put on. In fact, in public schools and emergency rooms, parents must give consent before their child can be treated with so much as an aspirin. Most voters agree that it is outrageous to allow a child to undergo any surgical procedure, let alone an invasive, irreversible procedure such as an abortion, without parental notification."

  The American Academy of Pediatrics offers an opposing view: "Adolescents should be strongly encouraged to involve their parents and other trusted adults in decisions regarding pregnancy termination, and the majority of them voluntarily do so. Legislation mandating parental involvement does not achieve the intended benefit of promoting family communication, but it does increase the risk of harm to the adolescent by delaying access to appropriate medical care."