Here is the Question:
Because laws were enjoined, Alaska, California, New Mexico and Illinois currently have no laws requiring any parental involvement. As you can see, in California where I am located, Susan who had the mental capacity which was expected for a minor her age, would have the autonomous right to an abortion if that was her decision and without any notification or consent of her parents.
As an example, if this scenario was occuring in California, the physician was wrong by not talking first to the patient without the mother present and getting the patient's permission to disclose the diagnosis to the mother. Also, the physician was wrong to set the alternatives simply as abortion vs continuing the pregnancy. In response to Susan's statement, the physician should have provided her with possible outcomes if a child is delivered such as Susan's parents being responsible for the child until Susan could take full responsibility for her child's care or having the child adopted by another family. With regard to abortion in the United States, as long as the patient is educated with regard to the consequences of abortion, there is always the option for the minor to obtain one even if her parents.are made aware and is rejected by them. That mechanism is through
a judicial parental bypass procedure which is usually decided in keeping with the minor's request.
One other point. in view of the law, the physician should not take sides in any conflict of opinions between parents and minor and certainly not express the physician's own moral views. Attempt to mediate the conflict should only involve educating the parents and minor regarding the clinical facts and the current law. In my view, there are no other philosophical or ethical models to use in this situation except simply the ethical principle of minor patient autonomy as prescribed by law. ..Maurice.
A 12 year old Susan began complaining to her mother about having frequent cramps, headaches and backaches as well as being nauseated. The mother began to assumed that her daughther may be experiencing early symptoms of her menstration cycle and decided that she would make an appointment with the family doctor to discuss with her and her daughther about the changes her body is now going through. The doctor gladly met with the mother and daughter and ran a regular checkup on Susan. A few days later the doctor informed the mother that her and her daughter should meet with him right away. The doctor informed the mother and daughter that the symptoms that Susan was having may have not been a sign of menstration but symptoms that Susan was pregnant. The doctor gave the mother and dauther the option of Susan going through with her pregnancy or to terminate the pregnancy as soon as possible. The mother who was very upset and distraught told the doctor that Susan can not have an abortion she is too young. However Susan said " I am not mature enough to have a child".
Based on ethical theories such as (utilitarian, Kantian etc.) which of them would be reasonable to think that Susan holds?
Was the doctor right for telling both susan and her mother at the same time?
Since both parties have two different answers how could he use the MORAL Model to help them come to an agreement?
Here is my Response:
Obviously, Susan's response suggests that she would choose abortion. However, if Susan did not want to continue with the pregnancy and if Susan was a resident in the United States, it is the federal and state laws pertaining to minors and abortions which set how a decision is to be made and not ethical theories or principles except patient autonomy. You can read all about the laws and the differences between states in the Guttmacher Institute "State Policies in Brief: Parental Involvement in Minor's Abortions".
Here is the pertinent text. State tables are available in the full text.Based on ethical theories such as (utilitarian, Kantian etc.) which of them would be reasonable to think that Susan holds?
Was the doctor right for telling both susan and her mother at the same time?
Since both parties have two different answers how could he use the MORAL Model to help them come to an agreement?
Here is my Response:
Obviously, Susan's response suggests that she would choose abortion. However, if Susan did not want to continue with the pregnancy and if Susan was a resident in the United States, it is the federal and state laws pertaining to minors and abortions which set how a decision is to be made and not ethical theories or principles except patient autonomy. You can read all about the laws and the differences between states in the Guttmacher Institute "State Policies in Brief: Parental Involvement in Minor's Abortions".
BACKGROUND: A majority of states require parental involvement in a minor’s decision to have an abortion. In light of two U.S. Supreme Court rulings that prohibit parents from having absolute veto over their daughters’ decision to have an abortion, many states require the consent or notification of only one parent, usually 24 or 48 hours before the procedure. Many parental involvement requirements also include a medical emergency exception and a judicial bypass procedure, through which a minor may receive court approval to obtain an abortion without parental involvement. Not all states adhere to this model. On the more stringent end of the spectrum, a handful of states require the consent or notification of both parents. On the other end, several states allow grandparents or other adult relatives to be involved in place of the minors’ parents, or as in Maine the law allows a minor with the guidance and counseling of an abortion provider to consent to the procedure. In cases of neglect or abuse, some states waive the consent or notification requirement altogether. State court decisions have also contributed to the diversity in requirements: Some state courts have enjoined laws they conclude violate their states’ constitutions; at the same time, similar or even more restrictive laws remain in effect in other states.
HIGHLIGHTS:
34 states require some parental involvement in a minor’s decision to have an abortion.
22 states require parental consent only; 2 of which require both parents to consent.
10 states require parental notification only; 1 of which requires that both parents be notified.
2 states require both parental consent and notification.
All of the 34 states that require parental involvement have an alternative process for minors seeking an abortion.
34 states include a judicial bypass procedure, which allows a minor to obtain approval from a court.
6 states also permit a minor to obtain an abortion if a grandparent or other adult relative is involved in the decision.
Most states that require parental involvement make exceptions under certain circumstances.
33 states permit a minor to obtain an abortion in a medical emergency.
14 states permit a minor to obtain an abortion in cases of abuse, assault, incest or neglect.
Because laws were enjoined, Alaska, California, New Mexico and Illinois currently have no laws requiring any parental involvement. As you can see, in California where I am located, Susan who had the mental capacity which was expected for a minor her age, would have the autonomous right to an abortion if that was her decision and without any notification or consent of her parents.
As an example, if this scenario was occuring in California, the physician was wrong by not talking first to the patient without the mother present and getting the patient's permission to disclose the diagnosis to the mother. Also, the physician was wrong to set the alternatives simply as abortion vs continuing the pregnancy. In response to Susan's statement, the physician should have provided her with possible outcomes if a child is delivered such as Susan's parents being responsible for the child until Susan could take full responsibility for her child's care or having the child adopted by another family. With regard to abortion in the United States, as long as the patient is educated with regard to the consequences of abortion, there is always the option for the minor to obtain one even if her parents.are made aware and is rejected by them. That mechanism is through
a judicial parental bypass procedure which is usually decided in keeping with the minor's request.
One other point. in view of the law, the physician should not take sides in any conflict of opinions between parents and minor and certainly not express the physician's own moral views. Attempt to mediate the conflict should only involve educating the parents and minor regarding the clinical facts and the current law. In my view, there are no other philosophical or ethical models to use in this situation except simply the ethical principle of minor patient autonomy as prescribed by law. ..Maurice.
James
Invite as author
Inconsistency
With regard to the state of California, here is the law:
A minor may consent to an abortion without
parental consent and without court permission.
(American Academy of Pediatrics v. Lungren, 16
Cal.4th 307 (1997)).
The health care provider is not permitted to inform a
parent or legal guardian without minor’s consent. The
provider can only share the minor’s medical records with
the signed consent of the minor. (Cal. Health & Safety
Code §§ 123110(a), 123115(a); Cal. Civ. 56.10, 56.11).
For a very interesting detailing of how the California law is to be carried out, here is a publication written both for the healthcare providers and the teens from the Adolescent Health Working Group titled "Understanding Confidentiality and Minor Consent in California 2002"
http://publichealth.
..Maurice.
EditSaveCancelDeleteDeleteBlock this userReport abusive commentHide report window
Tiff1
Invite as author
Untitled
Once again thank you !
EditSaveCancelDeleteDeleteBlock this userReport abusive commentHide report window