An Illinois law that would require teenagers to notify their parents before getting abortions has been on hold for 15 years, stalled by ongoing legal challenges alleging privacy, gender equality and other violations of civil liberties. Leslie J. Reagan, a professor of law, of history and of women's studies, discusses the still-pending law and its implications in an interview with News Bureau Business & Law Editor Jan Dennis. Reagan examines the history of abortion in her newest book, "Dangerous Pregnancies: Mothers, Disabilities and Abortion in Modern America."
Abortion opponents argue that parents should be involved when teens consider terminating a pregnancy, while abortion rights advocates maintain good family communication cannot be mandated. What are your thoughts on that debate?
There is no debate on whether it's a good idea for teenagers to talk with their parents about pregnancy and the possibility of an abortion. In fact, most teens do talk with at least one parent about their abortions, and many bring parents with them to clinics for the abortion procedure. Creating good communication within families, however, is not what these laws are about. Their purpose is to frighten teenagers who are afraid to admit their sexuality and their pregnancies to their parents and to make the process of receiving an abortion as scary, slow and stigmatized as possible. This statute includes a 48-hour waiting period. That waiting period can be logistically difficult for a teenager to negotiate - getting across town or to another county, finding rides or missing school.
For some teens, it is dangerous to speak with parents who are abusive. Some want to protect stressed parents from this crisis, while others are scared and no law will make them talk to their parents. Parental consent laws include a "judicial bypass" option, which allows the teenager to talk with a judge and explain why she cannot talk with her parents about her decision. However, this too is designed to intimidate young women. Few adults would feel comfortable talking with a judge about their sex lives. Teenagers, if they even know of this option, are highly likely to avoid this humiliating process of gaining permission.
In the face of these restrictive laws, a few couples have induced miscarriages by having boyfriends beat young women's stomachs. These efforts reveal the high level of desperation and lack of information among some teens.
There are now young women attempting to self-induce abortions using bleach and other substances who are landing in emergency rooms. This is a horrific step backward in time. When abortion was illegal in the United States, hospitals had separate wards for septic-infected abortion cases. Cook County Hospital saw nearly 5,000 women every year coming in infected, injured or bleeding because of self-induced and illegal abortions. When abortion was legalized, these wards disappeared.
Thirty-four states already require parental notification and 24 require parental consent before a minor obtains an abortion. Will those laws eventually spread nationwide or will there continue to be states without consent laws that will be magnets for teens seeking abortions?
Parental notification and parental consent laws have spread across the nation because they sound reasonable and because teenagers are among the most powerless of American citizens. They cannot vote and don't have the money to influence campaigns. Teenagers are treated as irresponsible, unthinking and in need of control. Misinformation about the purposes and effects of these statutes has also made passage of laws easier. More parents need to know the real effects of these laws on teenagers. Young adults who remember what it was like to be in high school could contribute to this political and public debate by speaking frankly about the realities of teenagers, relationships and unexpected pregnancies.
It is likely that there will be certain states where abortion will remain more accessible and affordable to all women, including teens, and where parental consent and notification laws will fail. Prior to Roe v. Wade, several states repealed their criminal abortion laws - namely Colorado, Hawaii, Washington, and, most importantly, New York in 1970. Women from all over the country went to New York, but travel was expensive and not everyone could go. The poorest of women - often black or Latina - still self-induced their abortions, and some of them died while others were able to fly to open, safe and legal abortion clinics.
The term "magnet," however, gives an incorrect impression, as though safe abortion clinics attract or compel women to them. But that is not how abortion works. Women of all classes, religions, races and ages have turned to abortion when they felt it was necessary throughout American history. States and clinics where abortions are accessible aren't magnets; they are providing a needed medical procedure. Parental notification and consent laws will push those teens with the funds and wherewithal to cross state lines in order to obtain abortion. We have a long history that shows us that laws will not stop the practice of abortion. The question is under what conditions will women - and teenagers in particular - obtain abortions. Will the atmosphere be respectful of their abilities to think and make moral decisions or will it be humiliating and punitive? Will it be safe and will they feel comforted or threatened? Parental notification and permission statutes are not intended to help teenagers - to grant them respect or to provide help. Instead, they are intended to force them to confess to their parents and face the consequences, which the proponents of these statutes and many teens expect to be shame and rage.
Are there alternatives to parental notification laws that states should explore?
If states are interested in better family communication, then they could fund family therapy and counseling. Abstinence-only programs have produced ignorance among teens and young adults and contributed to the difficulty of talking about sex and reproduction.
State legislators could instead ensure that schools offer honest and useful sex education. They could pass statutes guaranteeing comprehensive health services - including access to contraceptives, abortion and pre-natal care - for all women and also provide the financial and educational support that makes it possible for women who want to become mothers to do so.
Finally, it is notable that these statutes are directed at young women. They contribute to a larger political culture that distrusts and blames girls and women, that distorts the truth about women's attitudes toward pregnancy and children, and paints women who seek abortions as thoughtless. The truth is that decisions to prevent pregnancy or terminate a pregnancy are also decisions about family and parenting. I would most like to see a more respectful attitude toward teenaged women that recognizes their moral capacities to make decisions and addresses the complexities and realities of teenagers' lives rather than the passage of statutes that are not compassionate, but are punitive and demeaning. I don't know how to legislate that.