Proposition 85: A Libertarian Perspective

 

Forward Article to a Friend

Print Article

 

California Proposition 85 aims to legislate increased communication between minors seeking an abortion and their parents. While at first glance such a policy may appear to be in the best interests of all parties involved, the functional effects require a closer examination. Abortion is a hotly contested issue that continues to divide our nation, through expensive political campaigns and fierce advocacy battles coming from both sides. Proposition 85 would bring that battle to the home.

Proposition 85 does not say that a minor is not sufficiently mature to determine whether or not to have an abortion. It merely requires that she inform her parents of that decision—parental consent is not required for the abortion to go forward. In and of itself, Proposition 85 will do nothing to make abortion illegal. So the impact of this legislation is not immediately obvious.

Proposition 85 affects the young women who reasoned that they want an abortion and also logically reasoned that discussing this with their parents is not in their best interests. If for whatever reason, be it an abusive household, unsympathetic parents, or simple fear, a teenage girl feels that talking to her parents about the decision that she made to get an abortion would have a negative outcome, then the government should not coerce her to do so.

Some may perceive an inconsistency between the current lack of parental notification for abortion and the requirement that parents consent to the administration of aspirin from a school nurse. However, under current law, a minor can freely go to a store and purchase aspirin and take it herself without notifying her parents; if Prop 85 passes it will require that a minor notify her parents before getting an abortion, but will not require her to tell her parents if she performs the abortion herself, a dangerous, gruesome, and risky prospect to the change in the status quo. It is for this reason the law currently treats abortion differently from other procedures. Abortion is not an ordinary medical procedure, and thus the comparison to ingrown toenails is rather weak. A teenage girl is not likely to face ridicule, retribution, and stigmatization for the removal of an ingrown toenail, for abortion the same cannot be said.
If a sixteen year old girl has a child she is treated as a full legal guardian for that child and is responsible in the eyes of the law to make medical decisions on the child’s behalf. Therefore, it is not a matter of inconsistency to allow such an individual to independently weigh the pros and cons of having an abortion.

Proposition 85 is a recycled version of last year’s Proposition 73, but with 300 of the 3,000 original words removed so that it could appear on the ballot again even though it has already been rejected by California voters. This leads to an undue nuisance and expense to California taxpayers for its repetition. The prospect of increased back-ally and self-induced abortions is not just a scare tactic, it is a reality. And so, the California Medical Association, the California Nurses Association, California School Health Centers Association, and the American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists all formally oppose Proposition 85, given their professional experience.