Planned Parenthood’s gold heist broke in news the other day. Federal Judge Williams awarded the abortionists a hefty $380,000 in legal fees as a reward for its lawsuit against the parents of Idaho. Like salt in the open wound, we have to pay them for depriving our daughters of a Parental Consent law.
Making matters worse is bad reporting by folks like Rebecca Boone of the AP.
She misleads taxpayers into believing the problem with our current parental consent law is that it would turn girls into criminals – when, in fact, we’ve been working to protect our daughters from criminals who commit incest or rape against them.
Ms. Boone condemns the work we have done this session to restore Parental Consent by writing:
“[Deputy Attorney General Jeremy] Chou also said Sali’s new proposal may have the same problems as previous laws: It requires a report to law enforcement if a minor seeking a consent waiver has engaged in criminal activity.
“In Idaho, it is illegal for all minors to engage in sexual activity, whether it is consensual or not. That, state attorneys said, would create a chilling effect on a minor’s decision to have an abortion.” [Idaho Statesman, April 4, 2004]
That is a gross, if somewhat subtle, misrepresentation of the language in SB 1483, now pending before the Idaho Legislature. In fact, the bill states:
“Parental consent or judicial authorization is not required if the minor certifies that the pregnancy resulted from [forcible] rape … or sexual conduct with the minor by the minor’s parent, stepparent, uncle, grandparent, sibling, adoptive parent, legal guardian or foster parent. The physician performing the abortion shall report the sexual conduct with the minor to the proper law enforcement officials….”
In other words, the doctor who learns that the girl has been victimized is required to protect her. That notion already exists in other parts of Idaho Code, and applies to doctors, teachers, counselors, and others. What makes this provision unique is that it helps relieve the burden on the girl of either going to a parent or even to court. But it reinforces the abortionist’s obligation to take steps to protect the girl from further abuse.
Ms. Boone also fails to inform her readers that this language comes directly from Arizona’s Parental Consent statute – already upheld by the liberals at the 9th Circuit.