Seattle school provides abortion for student without notifying parents

posted at 3:10 pm on March 25, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

For those of us who are parents, the release forms for school activities are a ubiquitous part of life. Usually, they make good sense, as we want to make sure that our children get medical treatment quickly when circumstances make parental notification first too complicated for prompt attention. In Seattle, a high school used such a release to procure an abortion for a 15-year-old student, and her parents are outraged. KOMO reported earlier this week on the story:

When she signed a consent form, Jill figured it meant her 15 year old could go to the Ballard Teen Health Center located inside the high school for an earache, a sports physical, even birth control, but not for help terminating a pregnancy.

“She took a pregnancy test at school at the teen health center,” she said. “Nowhere in this paperwork does it mention abortion or facilitating abortion.”

Jill says her daughter, a pro-life advocate, was given a pass, put in a taxi and sent off to have an abortion during school hours all without her family knowing.

“We had no idea this was being facilitated on campus,” said Jill. “They just told her that if she concealed it from her family, that it would be free of charge and no financial responsibility.”

The video report mentions that the mother is pro-choice, not pro-life, which makes the story even stranger. I’d question how they got a 15-year-old pro-life advocate to agree to the abortion, except I have a pretty damned good idea, having lived through a not-dissimilar situation with my daughter-in-law and son during their senior year. I’d bet dollars to donuts that they pressured a frightened and confused adolescent into that decision just when she needed her parents most.

At the end, the clinic’s management tries to use the excuse that they can’t list every ailment on a consent form. However, if they’re going to procure abortions for 15-year-olds, then perhaps they can mention those. That falls pretty far outside the realm of scraped knees, broken fingers, and headaches, after all.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Let me get this straight: If my daughter wants to take a freaking Tylenol at school, she needs a note from my as her parent but if she wants to have an abortion without my consent, that’s A-OK?

I don’t give a crap if you are pro-choice. This is AnninCa-ed up, big time.

NoLeftTurn on March 25, 2010 at 4:23 PM

Make sure you inspect your daughters backpack every morning. She might be snuggling into school a Bible or a pocket Constitution.

Wade on March 25, 2010 at 4:27 PM

I’m shocked that anyone is surprised by this at all.

Our own small school district is putting in a community “health clinic” in the high school for the stated intent of providing greater health access to the children of the district. The school district will get public funds for the placement of the clinic, which is the point of course in this cash-strapped school distict. A small agricultural community in Oregon – enough said.

They promise to allow a vote on whether to provide contraception, but we all know this is exactly what will happen and more as in example above – it is sad that so many Americans are so numb and tuned out that they can’t navigate the world around them or see the true intentions of the ppl in charge.

I am more and more thankful for homeschooling every single day.

Oh and in case you don’t think this won’t happen in almost every public high school in the nation:
http://www.lifenews.com/nat5364.html

quiz1 on March 25, 2010 at 4:28 PM

I get that pro-choicers don’t consider it murder, but can we at least agree that it’s an important, possibly life-changing decision, one that shouldn’t be made quickly under stress?

I thought even most pro-choicers abhorred the idea of it being used casually as birth control.

Esthier on March 25, 2010 at 4:25 PM

Jimbo3 doesn’t want you inserting your influence on your children – that’s what state provided school administrators are for.

gwelf on March 25, 2010 at 4:28 PM

TheBlueSite on March 25, 2010 at 4:26 PM

No no, that’s good advice.

If you’re Bill Ayers kids, anyway.

Probably raised nothing but gerbils for the habitrail in his pants, so he avoided having that happen.

NoDonkey on March 25, 2010 at 4:29 PM

–I would, although I agreed a few months ago to notify another poster in that situation who said he and his wife would adopt the baby.

Jimbo3 on March 25, 2010 at 4:11 PM

That’s actually pretty admirable.

BadgerHawk on March 25, 2010 at 4:30 PM

Isn’t that considered Statutory rape ?

macncheez on March 25, 2010 at 3:30 PM
“We had no idea this was being facilitated on campus,” said Jill. “They just told her that if she concealed it from her family, that it would be free of charge and no financial responsibility.”
Doesn’t this make the school system guilty of “Obstruction of Justice” by attempting to cover up a potential rape? Seems like the police need to investigate, with criminal charges for the involved school officials.

dominigan on March 25, 2010 at 4:21 PM

The Washington statutes seem to make sex with a minor (below either sixteen or eighteen) illegal only when there the ages are about five years apart and if there’s some sort of trusting relationship between the people. Many states have similar laws, because they don’t want to throw nineteen year old Bobby in jail for having sex with seventeen year old Cindy.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9A.44

Jimbo3 on March 25, 2010 at 4:31 PM

That’s actually pretty admirable.

BadgerHawk on March 25, 2010 at 4:30 PM

Yes, but somehow a law allowing a public school to abet in killing your grandchild is Okey-Dokey.

nico on March 25, 2010 at 4:32 PM

Advocating the murder of your grandchild…

dominigan on March 25, 2010 at 4:25 PM

Yep. And if a living grandchild ever finds these comments, every time grandfather picks them up and cuddles them they can think “Grandpa says he loves me but he would have gladly had mommy kill me if I had been a inconvenience.”

29Victor on March 25, 2010 at 4:32 PM

“It makes my head shake. And Ballard is in a very conservative, Scandinavian community.”

Ballard hasn’t been “scandinavian” in more than 20 years. The old joke about elderly drivers in Ballard is just that – old. Seattle, all of it, is a progressive dream-land…..

quiz1 on March 25, 2010 at 4:33 PM

After the last few days there is no way I would go up in the Statue of Liberty beause she is fixing to stop crying and go to shaking her head.

Dire Straits on March 25, 2010 at 4:33 PM

It appears from the story and the comments that everyone is missing a critical point.

When she signed a consent form, Jill figured it meant her 15 year old could go to the Ballard Teen Health Center located inside the high school for an earache, a sports physical, even birth control, but not for help terminating a pregnancy.

This is a a case of statutory rape The girl is under the age of consent. The abortion mill and the school were required to notify the authorities and violated the law by not doing so.

The girl was pressured not to tell her parents and told that if she told, they would have to pay for the abortion. If she did not pay it was “free”.

“We had no idea this was being facilitated on campus,” said Jill. “They just told her that if she concealed it from her family, that it would be free of charge and no financial responsibility.”

sabbahillel on March 25, 2010 at 4:33 PM

Jimbo3 on March 25, 2010 at 4:31 PM

Seriousy though, if your local school administrator coerced your 15 year old daughter to get an abortion and the clinic pressured her not to tell you about it you’d be fine with this? No emotional or intellectual reaction whatsoever? Even if your pro choice you don’t see this as a gross intrusion of the state into your family?

gwelf on March 25, 2010 at 4:34 PM

Step 1: Teach kids to kill babies.
Step 2: Teach kids to kill parents.
Step 3: the horror….

TwilightStruggler on March 25, 2010 at 4:23 PM

Yep. The kids were inconvenient so people offed them. Now when we have nationalized healthcare the parents will be too expensive…turnabout is fair play I suppose.

29Victor on March 25, 2010 at 4:34 PM

Jimbo3 on March 25, 2010 at 4:31 PM

It’s not below 16 and 18 it’s between sixteen and eighteen.

So yes, if the girl is 16 and the boy is 20, it’s not a violation of the law.

But if the girl is below 16 it is a violation, from how I read it.

NoDonkey on March 25, 2010 at 4:38 PM

I’m not at all assuming anything long term. The girl was scared and insanely vulnerable. In that state, it wouldn’t take much of a relationship or even much prodding. I said earlier that I’ve seen it myself, and in that case the woman was an adult. She hadn’t planning on having an abortion. It’s not that she was pro-life, but it wasn’t why she went to the clinic. She went there for counseling because her boyfriend had cheated (they had been planning on raising the baby) and came out in a total daze with an appointment for an abortion.

She too was in a vulnerable state and wasn’t able to fully process the decision she was making. She was taken advantage of by people who didn’t know her and don’t care about her.

I get that pro-choicers don’t consider it murder, but can we at least agree that it’s an important, possibly life-changing decision, one that shouldn’t be made quickly under stress?

I thought even most pro-choicers abhorred the idea of it being used casually as birth control.

Esthier on March 25, 2010 at 4:25 PM

–I agree with you that it shouldn’t be made under stress (although being pregnant and unmarried is probably a huge amount of stress by itself). I don’t object to a waiting period (so long as the information and the counseling can be done over the phone or internet; otherwise, it just becomes a way to make the abortion more expensive rather than really being about providing information and allowing time to consider it).

Now maybe I’m giving fifteen year olds (or even twenty one year olds) credit for having more maturity than they really do. But she was a pro-life advocate. I would have thought it would have taken a whole bunch of arm twisting for her to have changed her views in this situation. And there’s no evidence that happened (for now). I just don’t see how people (apparently) telling her that she can have an abortion without telling her parents and ordering her a taxi (and, yes, maybe even walking with her to the taxi) is coersion or pressure or taking advantage of her.

Isn’t that (perhaps except for the taxi) just telling her what her options are?

Jimbo3 on March 25, 2010 at 4:40 PM

Isn’t that (perhaps except for the taxi) just telling her what her options are?

Jimbo3 on March 25, 2010 at 4:40 PM

Reread that sentence. If you don’t see the irony, I give up.

nico on March 25, 2010 at 4:43 PM

Jimbo3,

How would you react if your grandchild were aborted by your own 15 year old daughter without any prior consent or consultation with you? You’d chalk it up to good ole HIPAA and go on your merry way? You’d have no outrage?

gwelf on March 25, 2010 at 4:08 PM

Or how does the girl feel knowing she has a parent that probably thought no more of her when she was in utero?

jimmy2shoes on March 25, 2010 at 4:43 PM

Isn’t that (perhaps except for the taxi) just telling her what her options are?

Jimbo3 on March 25, 2010 at 4:40 PM

I think the most disturbing thing is that this sentence doesn’t describe a suitable/essential role for her parents in your mind – but the proper role of the state.

gwelf on March 25, 2010 at 4:43 PM

TwilightStruggler on March 25, 2010 at 4:23 PM

You don’t need a step 2. Once you have taught someone it is okay to kill a pre-born baby because it is an inconvenience it is a natural progression to be able to kill anyone because they are an inconvenience.

chemman on March 25, 2010 at 4:44 PM

I had a student with a splinter in his hand just this week. School nurse said all she could do was put a band aid on it due to liability. Couldn’t pull out the freakin splinter. I didn’t have a pair of tweezers my self, that was the only reason I sent the kid to the nurse. She said we no one was allowed to touch it.

JellyToast on March 25, 2010 at 4:44 PM

Now maybe I’m giving fifteen year olds (or even twenty one year olds) credit for having more maturity than they really do. But she was a pro-life advocate. I would have thought it would have taken a whole bunch of arm twisting for her to have changed her views in this situation. And there’s no evidence that happened (for now). I just don’t see how people (apparently) telling her that she can have an abortion without telling her parents and ordering her a taxi (and, yes, maybe even walking with her to the taxi) is coersion or pressure or taking advantage of her.

Isn’t that (perhaps except for the taxi) just telling her what her options are?

Jimbo3 on March 25, 2010 at 4:40 PM

15 year olds are still kids- you cannot expect them to have the abilities that adults do. The pruning process in the brain continues to age 25. Don’t for one minute think that kids are little adults- they are not. That’s why they don’t have legal capacity, and why they can’t vote, drink
or get married yet. Jeesh! Your ignorance is appalling for an adult.

theenforser on March 25, 2010 at 4:45 PM

Jimbo3 on March 25, 2010 at 4:31 PM

It’s not below 16 and 18 it’s between sixteen and eighteen.

So yes, if the girl is 16 and the boy is 20, it’s not a violation of the law.

But if the girl is below 16 it is a violation, from how I read it.

NoDonkey on March 25, 2010 at 4:38 PM

This is the statue for sexual misconduct with a minor in the second degree, which looks to be the most minor violation in Washington and so I’m assuming it is the law with the broadest application. If I’m wrong let me know:

1) A person is guilty of sexual misconduct with a minor in the second degree when: (a) The person has, or knowingly causes another person under the age of eighteen to have, sexual contact with another person who is at least sixteen years old but less than eighteen years old and not married to the perpetrator, if the perpetrator is at least sixty months older than the victim, is in a significant relationship to the victim, and abuses a supervisory position within that relationship in order to engage in or cause another person under the age of eighteen to engage in sexual contact with the victim; (b) the person is a school employee who has, or knowingly causes another person under the age of eighteen to have, sexual contact with an enrolled student of the school who is at least sixteen years old and not more than twenty-one years old and not married to the employee, if the employee is at least sixty months older than the student; or (c) the person is a foster parent who has, or knowingly causes another person under the age of eighteen to have, sexual contact with his or her foster child who is at least sixteen.

(2) Sexual misconduct with a minor in the second degree is a gross misdemeanor.

Jimbo3 on March 25, 2010 at 4:45 PM

Heard a fascinating discussion about this topic and how harmful it is for young girls to deal with this subject alone and in secrecy from their parents. Many of these young girls who are encouraged to keep such deep secrets from their parents are acting out this inner conflict through eating disorders and cutting.

These “educators” get in between the relationship between parent and child and then they leave the families to clean up the mess and destruction that they, themselves, caused.

pjean on March 25, 2010 at 4:46 PM

Damn teachers unions!

/s

Dr. ZhivBlago on March 25, 2010 at 4:47 PM

15 year olds are still kids- you cannot expect them to have the abilities that adults do. The pruning process in the brain continues to age 25. Don’t for one minute think that kids are little adults- they are not. That’s why they don’t have legal capacity, and why they can’t vote, drink
or get married yet. Jeesh! Your ignorance is appalling for an adult.

theenforser on March 25, 2010 at 4:45 PM

Jeez, you mean a 20-year-old hasn’t fully matured yet? Wow. Stop the presses!

nico on March 25, 2010 at 4:47 PM

Jimbo3 on March 25, 2010 at 4:40 PM

They don’t have any business telling her “what her options are” in this situation and I don’t give a damn, again, whether it’s legal or not.

They haven’t raised her, they don’t know her, they have no responsibility for her.

If she’s injured or if she becomes depressed afterwards, what are they going to do? More “help”?

People like you just don’t get it. We don’t want you or people who think like you, screwing around in our lives. Period.

You seem to think it’s your right to do so and that if we don’t like it, we can just STFU and take it.

But we’re the uncivilized, unsophisticated, unreasonable bunch because we take offense when people like you, butt into our lives and do things like this.

Your side is just lucky that we are as nice and civilized as we are. Very, very lucky.

NoDonkey on March 25, 2010 at 4:47 PM

Many states have similar laws, because they don’t want to throw nineteen year old Bobby in jail for having sex with seventeen year old Cindy.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9A.44

Jimbo3 on March 25, 2010 at 4:31 PM

Silly me. I thought thats what the judge was for. To make those decisions. Oh wait…I remember…we had (have) judges who think child molesters are cool peeps!

BobMbx on March 25, 2010 at 4:48 PM

In two recent Supreme court cases the ACLU argued that:
1) a 14 year old child has the cognitive ability to comprehend life or death decisions and therefore can choose to have an abortion without parental knowlege.
2) a 17 year old child does NOT have the cognitive ablitity to comprehend life or death decisions and therefore should not be executed for a multiple premeditated murder (now that he is age 23.)

barnone on March 25, 2010 at 4:49 PM

There’s more to this story that has been reported through other local Seattle media.

The girl was coached by school staff not to speak to her parents and informed that if she did the parents would be liable to pay the cost of the procedure.

Additionally, there was some suggestion by the girl that the school staff heavily lobbied her away from making the decision NOT to have the abortion. It has been reported that the girl has taken a strong pro-life position after having gone through this harrowing ordeal. A reporter also revealed that her information came from the girl’s boyfriend who was recently checked into a hospital for an undisclosed reason.

bryanmyrick on March 25, 2010 at 3:33 PM

I call BS on this because pro-choicers are always telling us that no one is pro-abortion, and the idea that she was pressured to have an abortion by the school staff contradicts that meme.

What kind of fool would doubt the intellectual integrity of such pro-choicers?

Bizarro No. 1 on March 25, 2010 at 4:50 PM

I think the most disturbing thing is that this sentence doesn’t describe a suitable/essential role for her parents in your mind – but the proper role of the state.

gwelf on March 25, 2010 at 4:43 PM

The girl should be able to ask what her options are – but getting a “hush-hush abortion” should not be one of those options in the first place.

I don’t object to the state teaching students what their BC options are at an appropriate age, but I do object to the state blindly handing out said options with tax dollars. If they wanna screw that bad they can raid their piggy banks and go to the nearest pharmacy or Wal-Mart for BC. Same thing here; making the options (and their consequences) plain is fine. Serving as a publicly-funded bailout mechanism for underage pregnant girls? Not really.

Dark-Star on March 25, 2010 at 4:50 PM

NoDonkey on March 25, 2010 at 4:47 PM

How deluded ARE people who can’t see these simple truths.

Touch my kid, liberals. Go ahead, touch him.

nico on March 25, 2010 at 4:51 PM

barnone on March 25, 2010 at 4:49 PM

Any wonder why Michael Savage calls liberalism a mental disorder.

chemman on March 25, 2010 at 4:51 PM

(2) Sexual misconduct with a minor in the second degree is a gross misdemeanor.

Jimbo3 on March 25, 2010 at 4:45 PM

This is unbelievable.

The only reason we have laws in this country, seems to be to give lawyers jobs.

Because most of them have nothing to do with reason or common sense.

I’m starting to see the point of the anarchists. At the very least, lawyers would become completely irrelevant.

NoDonkey on March 25, 2010 at 4:51 PM

In two recent Supreme court cases the ACLU argued that:
1) a 14 year old child has the cognitive ability to comprehend life or death decisions and therefore can choose to have an abortion without parental knowlege.
2) a 17 year old child does NOT have the cognitive ablitity to comprehend life or death decisions and therefore should not be executed for a multiple premeditated murder (now that he is age 23.)

barnone on March 25, 2010 at 4:49 PM

Just goes to show that with the right judges, you can make the Constitution say anything you want it to.

BobMbx on March 25, 2010 at 4:52 PM

Oh wait…I remember…we had (have) judges who think child molesters are cool peeps!

BobMbx on March 25, 2010 at 4:48 PM


2 years
in age difference hardly makes one a “Chester”. That’s just overreaction. Some of my senior classmates were 19, and would have risked jail for having sex with their junior counterparts. Where’s the logic in that?

Dark-Star on March 25, 2010 at 4:53 PM

–I would, although I agreed a few months ago to notify another poster in that situation who said he and his wife would adopt the baby.

Jimbo3 on March 25, 2010 at 4:11 PM

That was me. Please do not forget that if your daughter ever finds herself in this situation. You probably did not know this but we probably reside less than 30 miles from you here in the DFW metroplex.

The offer still stands so you (and your wife) may have access to your grandchild, and your daughter may have access to visit her child, if you so choose. We have previously adopted two children through the Gladney Center in Fort Worth.

We give thanks to the birth parents of our beautiful children every single day.

It is nice to know that, although our opinions on most issues are in complete disagreement, you sir, are a man of your word.

rukiddingme on March 25, 2010 at 4:53 PM

The girl should be able to ask what her options are – but getting a “hush-hush abortion” should not be one of those options in the first place.

I don’t object to the state teaching students what their BC options are at an appropriate age, but I do object to the state blindly handing out said options with tax dollars. If they wanna screw that bad they can raid their piggy banks and go to the nearest pharmacy or Wal-Mart for BC. Same thing here; making the options (and their consequences) plain is fine. Serving as a publicly-funded bailout mechanism for underage pregnant girls? Not really.

Dark-Star on March 25, 2010 at 4:50 PM

I don’t think it’s the role of the state (e.g., your local public school) to advise or give options to any in regards to anything having to do with deeply personal decisions. It’s not their role – period. It’s their job to teach English, Math, Science and History etc and to leave parenting up to parents.

gwelf on March 25, 2010 at 4:56 PM

gwelf on March 25, 2010 at 4:56 PM

Exactly.

Our schools are completely ineffective in performing their core mission, educating students.

Why they need to be funded as far as roles to circumvent the parents, I have no idea.

Because we don’t need a middleman to shill for Planned Parenthood, Planned Parenthood is pretty good at cheerfully peddling abortions to child victims of statutory rape.

NoDonkey on March 25, 2010 at 4:59 PM

I had a student with a splinter in his hand just this week. School nurse said all she could do was put a band aid on it due to liability. Couldn’t pull out the freakin splinter. I didn’t have a pair of tweezers my self, that was the only reason I sent the kid to the nurse. She said we no one was allowed to touch it.

JellyToast on March 25, 2010 at 4:44 PM

My daughter came home with a bandaged splinter yesterday. The nurse’s slip said it was in too deep to properly retrieve, but my daughter told her dance teacher and I that the principal told the nurse not to touch it. The damn splinter came right out when we took the bandaid off – it had been hurting her until then. I think the whole situation is a little strange.

And I would raise holy hell if I found that any of my children were taken off of school property for any reason without my prior and express consent. I don’t care if my daughter’s wallet is on the other side of the fence, you call me first. To think this child was taken off school property for a medical procedure without any parental notification! I understand she didn’t have to tell them about the abortion, but she was a minor off school property during the school day without parental authority. I have to send in a note, provide positive identification, and sign a log when I pick my daughter up from school for a doctor’s appointment due to liability – and from what I understand, this is the new norm.

I’m aghast at this story. Makes me want to cry, for the girl, her parents, the unborn child – even the father. Sad and enraging all around.

Anna on March 25, 2010 at 4:59 PM

Good thing she didn’t die.

tomas on March 25, 2010 at 5:00 PM

Gotta go for today, but appreciate the general lack of name calling about me on this thread.

Jimbo3 on March 25, 2010 at 5:00 PM

And I would raise holy hell if I found that any of my children were taken off of school property for any reason without my prior and express consent.

And if you did you would be the bad guy/bad girl here.

Because hey, we just need to accept liberals butting into every tiny aspect of our lives and the lives of our children.

And if we don’t like it, we can STFU and if we do something about it, we go to jail.

But what we want or think doesn’t matter. They have what passes for the law on their side.

NoDonkey on March 25, 2010 at 5:02 PM

Gotta go for today, but appreciate the general lack of name calling about me on this thread.
Jimbo3 on March 25, 2010 at 5:00 PM

And I appreciate your willingness to encourage a child to put their child up for adoption instead of having an abortion. At least we can agree on that.

gwelf on March 25, 2010 at 5:03 PM

Jimbo3 on March 25, 2010 at 4:40 PM

Government official letting you know your options? Good.

Talking to your parents first and making an informed decision? Not necessary according to the government officials. Really?

Your government is capable of taking care of the necessities without your parents, lets not involve them. Yeah, that helps.

Officials proposing not telling your parents, and giving you consequences if your parents are told? So it seems…

If you and your government official can’t keep secrets from your parents; what good is a nanny state? Right?

The Government will be your parent.
Only the Government cares for you.
Only the Government loves you.
Trust the Government more than you trust your parents. Obey and respect the government…

Does it look enough like a horror movie now for you to be a bit leery about where this is going?

If you (as an unrelated and uninvolved person) decide that you should get to have secrets between you and my child that I’m not told about and you get to decide what these secrets are… I’m probably not going to be happy about that.

Is that confusing you still? Lots of adults want to have “secrets” with underage teenage girls it seems; if you decide that’s ok in this case, why isn’t it generally ok? “Let’s not tell your parents what we just did” from the teacher… is that acceptable too?

gekkobear on March 25, 2010 at 5:03 PM

2 years in age difference hardly makes one a “Chester”. That’s just overreaction. Some of my senior classmates were 19, and would have risked jail for having sex with their junior counterparts. Where’s the logic in that?

Dark-Star on March 25, 2010 at 4:53 PM

My point was we used to rely on judges to see the merits of the case when determining sentence, and to use common sense. Unfortunately, a significant number of judges have failed society in that regard by letting child molesters off with little or no punishment. So, the people took it upon themselves to do the job that judges should be doing. The judges lost the faith and trust of the people; we didn’t just take their jobs away.

BobMbx on March 25, 2010 at 5:06 PM

Gotta go for today, but appreciate the general lack of name calling about me on this thread.
Jimbo3 on March 25, 2010 at 5:00 PM

Douchebag.

BobMbx on March 25, 2010 at 5:07 PM

And I appreciate your willingness to encourage a child to put their child up for adoption instead of having an abortion. At least we can agree on that.

gwelf on March 25, 2010 at 5:03 PM

If all of us can convince Jimbo3 and others like him that adoption is a viable alternative, we are well on our way to changing the mindset about abortion. It will take time, but we will do it, one person at a time.

rukiddingme on March 25, 2010 at 5:09 PM

How sad. Did they counsel her as to how this might effect her emotionally? Every woman I know who has had an abortion either went through depression after it or turned around and tried to get pregnant again to make up for it. They are all pro-life now.

thevastlane on March 25, 2010 at 4:23 PM

What would lead you to the idea that those pro-choicers might care about the emotional state of those they don’t discourage from having abortions?

Depression “caused” by abortion is a disturbing inconvenience which can not be acknowledged in any way, shape, or form by pro-abortionists, just like how Weiner couldn’t answer O’Reilly’s question about the IRS last night.

Bizarro No. 1 on March 25, 2010 at 5:13 PM

And I appreciate your willingness to encourage a child to put their child up for adoption instead of having an abortion. At least we can agree on that.

gwelf on March 25, 2010 at 5:03 PM

For the record, I believe Jimbo3 said he would in fact counsel his daughter to have an abortion, but would also notify rukiddingme of the situation in the event that his daughter was willing to allow the child to be adopted.

Texas requires at least one parent’s consent fwiw.

Missy on March 25, 2010 at 5:14 PM

–I agree with you that it shouldn’t be made under stress (although being pregnant and unmarried is probably a huge amount of stress by itself). I don’t object to a waiting period (so long as the information and the counseling can be done over the phone or internet; otherwise, it just becomes a way to make the abortion more expensive rather than really being about providing information and allowing time to consider it).

Of course it’s stressful as is, but some time to breathe and think about it could make a world a difference and prevent women from doing something they might regret the rest of their lives.

I wouldn’t want it to be any more intrusive than our gun laws. In this case, even a day to think about it would have been preferable.

I just don’t see how people (apparently) telling her that she can have an abortion without telling her parents and ordering her a taxi (and, yes, maybe even walking with her to the taxi) is coersion or pressure or taking advantage of her.

It’s not. I find it incredibly hard to believe nothing coercive was said though, especially if reports that she was pro-life before are true.

I find it far more likely that the counselor was telling her how much easier it would be for her to finish school and go to college this way and maybe a few other things that scared the kid into thinking this was the right choice.

I don’t have proof, but like you I believe it takes some arm twisting to convince a pro-lifer to have an abortion. Though it will take less arm twisting when the girl’s a minor and pregnant, and the person telling her abortion is her best option is an authority figure.

The only way they could have kept the presumption of not influencing the girl were if they’d left the decision completely in her hands, rather than giving her a ride there on school time.

Isn’t that (perhaps except for the taxi) just telling her what her options are?

Jimbo3 on March 25, 2010 at 4:40 PM

Not just the taxi, the time at school to take care of this and the explicit approval such an allowance gave.

I get that you don’t view it as the death of a child, but they were helping to facilitate this rather than just explaining how she could have done this herself. It’s one thing to tell an 18-year-old he has the right now to legally purchase cigarettes and another entirely to call him a taxi with directions to the nearest gas station. Or substitute any other even slightly controversial act if you choose.

Esthier on March 25, 2010 at 5:22 PM

even the father.

Anna on March 25, 2010 at 4:59 PM

I’m hoping the father just doesn’t even know.

Esthier on March 25, 2010 at 5:25 PM

I’m hoping the father just doesn’t even know.

Esthier on March 25, 2010 at 5:25 PM

Why?

gwelf on March 25, 2010 at 5:25 PM

If we just sit back and let the left have all the abortions they want, kill as many of their yet-to-be children…as they want, in 30 years we will have our country back.
sarc/off

lizzee on March 25, 2010 at 5:26 PM

Texas requires at least one parent’s consent fwiw.

Missy on March 25, 2010 at 5:14 PM

Correct, but there is a little more to the process.

There is a 48 hour window after birth that allows the mother to change her mind in the event she wants to keep the baby.

There also has to be a good faith effort to locate the father and obtain his relinquishment of rights.

Our first child was five days old when we adopted, our second child was two days old.

Our adoptions are considered open. We communicate with the birth parents on an annual basis at a minumum.

They grow up fast!

Esthier on March 25, 2010 at 5:22 PM

Hello Esthier. Just like the last time I saw you posting, off to play baseball with the kids.

Take care.

rukiddingme on March 25, 2010 at 5:28 PM

Well, at least she wasn’t caught singing Christmas Carols or something seditious like that. /s

tcn on March 25, 2010 at 5:36 PM

Why?

gwelf on March 25, 2010 at 5:25 PM

Because he had no say in the matter anyway.

Hello Esthier. Just like the last time I saw you posting, off to play baseball with the kids.

Take care.

rukiddingme on March 25, 2010 at 5:28 PM

That’s so sweet. I’m a little jealous. Enjoy the time.

Esthier on March 25, 2010 at 5:37 PM

I wouldn’t want to be any of the school officials if that were my daughter

I would consider them child molesters and work to put them six feet under

Sonosam on March 25, 2010 at 5:38 PM

rukiddingme on March 25, 2010 at 5:28 PM

Thank you for the update (I’m in Texas, so I should really know all this). And thank you for what you do to save children.

Missy on March 25, 2010 at 5:41 PM

Man. This is out of bounds. I hope the parents, and the girl, sue. I hope someone at that school is indicted for murder. Because, even if you claim to be ‘pro-choice’, when an abortion is forced upon an unwilling or helpless victim, it’s murder. Infanticide. Where’s the choice in that?

starboardhelm on March 25, 2010 at 5:53 PM

Answer: 6 to 9 months

Question: What’s the difference between abortion and murder?

starboardhelm on March 25, 2010 at 5:57 PM

The sacrament of child sacrifice is always a fixture for the godless.

daesleeper on March 25, 2010 at 6:15 PM

I wonder what the media would make of it if a 15 year-old girl was driven by public school counselors to a Bible study without parental notification instead of an abortion clinic? Or a tattoo parlor?

jdp629 on March 25, 2010 at 6:16 PM

This is why parental notification laws are so important. A minor should not be able to have an abortion without her parents being aware of the situation. Complications occur quite frequently, including those that are life threatening. If a young woman didn’t tell her parents she had the abortion, what will she do when she starts bleeding to death in her bathroom?

The way we deal with teenagers health is just absurd. At 15 a girl can’t go to the mall and get her ears pierced, yet she can go and have a surgery with very real consequences that may leave her harmed for the rest of her life. Morality aside, it is bad public health policy.

Vera on March 25, 2010 at 6:21 PM

This is one of the many reasons that we are homeschooling our children.

This also happened in Sacramento a few years ago. The girl in that instance died from complications.

Willow on March 25, 2010 at 6:28 PM

That consent form is for immediate treatment needs for things that occur at school, like a broken arm, or a bleeding cut, etc. It’s not for something that you have up to several months to decide on, like whether to have a mole removed.

It is definitely NOT a consent to let a school provide a free of charge SURGICAL PROCEDURE off campus, complete with transportation and everything without parental consent. I don’t care what the parental consent laws are, it’s not for schools to participate in. It’s one thing for the kid so skip school to go have an abortion in a state that doesn’t require parental consent (absolutely ludicrous that a surgical procedure that could kill the CHILD that is HAVING the abortion doesn’t require parental consent), but it is WAY out of bounds for another adult in an authority position to facilitate skipping school and doing it. So it goes even farther out of bounds if they did encouraging, and downright criminal if they coerced her.

And Jimbo3, did you notice in that legal stuff you quoted that it said between 16 and 18? She was 15.

How much do you want to bet that the father of the now dead child is a son of one of the school officials that participated in this travesty? For instance, the principal’s son gets a girl pregnant and does this to hide it . . . ?

PastorJon on March 25, 2010 at 6:38 PM

Wow. What if she died of complications from drugs, or some whacked out negligence on the part of the clinic?

ProudPalinFan on March 25, 2010 at 6:46 PM

I love how the left loved the idea that Iraq was a sovereign nation under saddam, a terrorist and world blight.

Then on the the other hand, parents are not given the same consideration regarding their offspring

those people would be in a serious predicament ifthat were my daughter

just consider what type of belief that someone has in order to execute such an act

uck the left

Sonosam on March 25, 2010 at 6:46 PM

–Who’s the “they”? The school or the parents? If it’s meant to be the parents, wouldn’t it be odd for the mother to be squawking about it? And if it’s the school nurse, how is telling the student that she doesn’t have to pay for it or tell her parents any sort of real pressure?

Jimbo3 on March 25, 2010 at 3:16 PM

I NEVER engage people here, but I have to ask, how would you see this situation if said 15 y old had a reaction to the meds or had hemorraged to death? Still think it would be the same situation? Also,can you please tell me how old you are?

di butler on March 25, 2010 at 7:05 PM

Jill says her daughter, a pro-life advocate, was given a pass, put in a taxi and sent off to have an abortion during school hours all without her family knowing.

Which means that this is more than irresponsible. There should be criminal charges against the school system including manslaughter charges against the school officials and clinic that killed off this life.

highhopes on March 25, 2010 at 7:09 PM

How much do you want to bet that the father of the now dead child is a son of one of the school officials that participated in this travesty? For instance, the principal’s son gets a girl pregnant and does this to hide it . . . ?

PastorJon on March 25, 2010 at 6:38 PM

I suspect you’ve got good intuition. There was some compelling reason why the school would have done this- even in Godless parts of America like Seattle.

highhopes on March 25, 2010 at 7:11 PM

I thought even most pro-choicers abhorred the idea of it being used casually as birth control.

Esthier on March 25, 2010 at 4:25 PM

They don’t abhor any of it, this is their blood ritual to Gaia.

tessa on March 25, 2010 at 7:26 PM

Progressives: The ones who snatch our children so they can abort our grandchildren.

starboardhelm on March 25, 2010 at 7:50 PM

Wow! Talk about over reaching. These Libs must be stopped. I hope this mom sues big time. This should get parents who really care about their children to thinking that maybe they had better pay close attention to what goes on in their childrens’ schools. Get involved, parents. This in intolerable.

BetseyRoss on March 25, 2010 at 7:59 PM

I seem to remember some concern when these health centers were first brought up over the abortion issue and we were assured that it would never happen. perhaps hotair could open up the archives and chech this for us?

Gwillie on March 25, 2010 at 8:06 PM

Let’s see. Proper response to a conspiracy of adults murdering your grandchild…

I’m trying to imagine the acts of depravity you’d have to commit to be guilty of over-doing it and I’ve got nothing.

Immolate on March 25, 2010 at 8:19 PM

I wonder what the media would make of it if a 15 year-old girl was driven by public school counselors to a Bible study without parental notification instead of an abortion clinic? Or a tattoo parlor?

jdp629 on March 25, 2010 at 6:16 PM

BINGO! If this were a church meeting on or off school grounds or a conservative political rally – the local media in Seattle would be SHOCKED! and OUTRAGED!

Someone independent should talk to the girl and find out what really happened. Why she pressured by the staff at the ‘health clinic’ or the school (maybe the father was a star athlete or, as someone suggested, related to an offical). If she is pro-life and they exerted undue pressure I’d say its premeditated murder on the part of the school officals, nurse, and abortion clinic.

BTW: Why is it free only if she conceals it from her family? That sounds very, fishy.

CrazyFool on March 25, 2010 at 11:26 PM

It’s the hypocrisy that kills me. Most abortions are invasive medical procedures with risks and possible complications that normally would, without question, require parental consent but we have to treat abortion as some super special exemption from reality because of the sacred “right” to “choice”. This is similar to the early days of HIV/AIDS infection when the medical community was forced to delay for years its appropriate treatment as an STD (partner notification, etc.) because of the overlay of gay rights issues. No one benefits when we try to deny reality.

I find it truly hard to believe that anyone who is actually a parent would be o.k. with a school taking your child off campus for medical treatment of any kind and then keeping it a secret from you.

inmypajamas on March 26, 2010 at 12:01 AM

Thank you for the update (I’m in Texas, so I should really know all this). And thank you for what you do to save children.

Missy on March 25, 2010 at 5:41 PM

I appreciate your kind words, but humbly ask that you direct your thanks to the birth parents.

The birth parents believed in the potential of their childrens’ lives.

They placed that potential in the hands of my wife and I.

The birth parents are the heroes, not us.

Gotta go for today, but appreciate the general lack of name calling about me on this thread.

Jimbo3 on March 25, 2010 at 5:00 PM

I was in a hurry when I posted earlier, I reread my post and see the need to clear something up:

I did not mean to imply that you were obligated to me in any way if your daughter would find herself in this situation.

I saw your comment and was surprised that you would even remember our initial conversation. I was also surprised that our conversation actually changed your thinking on the matter. When we started talking, you seemed convinced abortion was the only choice.

When I said that you were a man of your word I meant it, but not in the sense that you owe me anything. It was from the perspective that your position now is you will consider advising your daughter on adoption, whereas before your stated position indicated that you would not.

In retrospect, the statement should have read, you are a man of your word because your comments indicate that your position has indeed changed.

As far as debating the subject matter on this thread:

I understand as a lawyer you are merely pointing out the law, my response you is simply, in this case, the law is wrong and should be changed.

rukiddingme on March 26, 2010 at 12:37 AM

So what? Did they teach them all of the great songs about Obama???

Star20 on March 26, 2010 at 12:52 AM

So what? Did they teach them all of the great songs about Obama???

Star20 on March 26, 2010 at 12:52 AM

Sounds like a song…? Hmmm.

“’cause I can sing them songs about Obama
and I still do, all the sad ones, that I know…”

Dr. ZhivBlago on March 26, 2010 at 1:17 AM

This policy/program by the school is very odd, to me, anyway.

I can see why conservatives on this issue are appalled.

I’m pro-choice, but this is a bit over-the-top.

AnninCA on March 26, 2010 at 10:48 AM

BTW: Why is it free only if she conceals it from her family? That sounds very, fishy.

CrazyFool on March 25, 2010 at 11:26 PM

That’s probably because if she tells them, then they can pay for it.

I appreciate your kind words, but humbly ask that you direct your thanks to the birth parents.

The birth parents believed in the potential of their childrens’ lives.

They placed that potential in the hands of my wife and I.

The birth parents are the heroes, not us.

rukiddingme on March 26, 2010 at 12:37 AM

I think that’s a beautiful way to view it. After all, the children are a part of them.

There was a another thread, a long time ago now, where a few of us were talking about what we as pro-lifers could really do to convince people that abortion isn’t the answer, and the idea of adoption came up. Because it’s one thing to tell a woman she should have her baby and another to actually help her. We proposed some sort of health care organization that provides all other health services, including birth control, but instead of abortion offers adoption services.

Not really any closer to making that a reality though.

Esthier on March 26, 2010 at 11:45 AM

Esthier on March 26, 2010 at 11:45 AM

Thank you once again for your kind words Esthier.

The Gladney Center indeed has a program that allows the birth mother to stay in a private room and receive all the medical care that she needs during the pregnancy at no cost to the mother.

I would be surprised if there are no other other adoption agencies that offered a similiar program.

rukiddingme on March 26, 2010 at 12:23 PM

Or where’s the logic in the jail penalty?

blink on March 25, 2010 at 7:01 PM

That, and where’s the logic in simply sticking to the AOC. It’s high time that got ratcheted down a couple years anyway, we’re only fooling ourselves if we still think teenagers are innocent little flowers at 18. And we ought to add an age-difference clause to introduce some sanity.

Dark-Star on March 26, 2010 at 1:00 PM

I thought even most pro-choicers abhorred the idea of it being used casually as birth control.

Esthier on March 25, 2010 at 4:25 PM

The older ones do, but the younger generations of pro-choicers are very casual about it.

Dark-Star on March 26, 2010 at 1:02 PM

I was in a hurry when I posted earlier, I reread my post and see the need to clear something up:

I did not mean to imply that you were obligated to me in any way if your daughter would find herself in this situation.

I saw your comment and was surprised that you would even remember our initial conversation. I was also surprised that our conversation actually changed your thinking on the matter. When we started talking, you seemed convinced abortion was the only choice.

When I said that you were a man of your word I meant it, but not in the sense that you owe me anything. It was from the perspective that your position now is you will consider advising your daughter on adoption, whereas before your stated position indicated that you would not.

In retrospect, the statement should have read, you are a man of your word because your comments indicate that your position has indeed changed.

As far as debating the subject matter on this thread:

I understand as a lawyer you are merely pointing out the law, my response you is simply, in this case, the law is wrong and should be changed.

rukiddingme on March 26, 2010 at 12:37 AM

–Thanks. I did understand that. I obviously have no way to legally prevent my 19 year old daughter from having an abortion (and she is not required to tell me or my wife about it) but if she did, I would encourage her to exercise the adoption alternative and will get in touch with you. Thanks for the kind words.

PastorJon, sorry for my rush on this. You’re right that what I posted didn’t cover the situation with the 15 year old. Here’s the law that seems to cover that situation:

1) A person is guilty of rape of a child in the third degree when the person has sexual intercourse with another who is at least fourteen years old but less than sixteen years old and not married to the perpetrator and the perpetrator is at least forty-eight months older than the victim.

And all, one point I thought most people understood but may not have: This was a high school clinic, not a high school. So that would be a health care facility in all likelihood, hence the HIPAA rules. So some of the situations mentioned in posts wouldn’t apply unless a clinic is involved.

Jimbo3 on March 26, 2010 at 2:05 PM

I NEVER engage people here, but I have to ask, how would you see this situation if said 15 y old had a reaction to the meds or had hemorraged to death? Still think it would be the same situation? Also,can you please tell me how old you are?

di butler on March 25, 2010 at 7:05 PM

–I’d be p*ssed, obviously. Mid fifties.

Jimbo3 on March 26, 2010 at 2:07 PM

The godless must have their child sacrifice!

daesleeper on March 26, 2010 at 2:48 PM

Another example of “progressive” public school faculty using their authority to usurp the authority of the parents.
So glad I send my daughter to a good, private, Christian school. But feel sorry for those in the government schools, and will still do anything I can to stop this sort of nonsense in the public schools around here.

I’m pro-choice, but this is a bit over-the-top.

AnninCA on March 26, 2010 at 10:48 AM

Yeah, just a “bit”.

What really is “choice” anyway? From what I can tell, you either kill your baby, or you don’t. That’s the only “choice”.

Sterling Holobyte on March 26, 2010 at 6:29 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3