Rosemaery Lorefield

It doesn't disprove it either. It's brand new here.

Surreal

These aren't new laws, even if they are new where you live. Besides, coercion has a legal definition.

Misty Harley

I'm hoping someone with more knowledge can explain this because the one thing I never took away from the emancipation process is that now suddenly a 12YO is responsible for their own care and keeping which means they can do whatever they please, whenever they please.

I always took it to mean that the 12YO is now soley responsible for the choices of raising/not raising/aborting their own unborn/born child/fetus. That they alone were held responsible for those final decisions. That they alone (ninja edit: as in their signature goes on the dotted line) had to fill out the appropriate paperwork, etc to get assistance.

That a parent (me for instance) would still be responsible for the care and keeping of said 12YO and to a minimal degree the infant if it was kept (ie: making sure no neglect occurred in my home while they lived there) BUT at any time...the 12YO could turn to outside help without my interference if I was making her or her child's life a living hell.

Hopefully someone can clear that up that has some knowledge in this.

__________________

Asher Bertrand

Surreal - I'm curious. Do you think that 10 year old you mentioned was in a good position to make a life-changing decision like motherhood?

__________________

Surreal

I don't know.

She seemed to be very knowlegable about what was happening. She also seemed really on track as far as what she wanted from her life. Not knowing the circumstances behind the impregnation, I can't judge what she thought about sexuality. She did have lots of loving support.

Just my opinion, but I think that one of the reasons pre-teens/teens WANT a baby is because they want to fill an emotional hole in their lives. I saw no evidence of neediness in this girl. And no blaming/judging was evident in the behavior of the relatives.

Is it a good idea for a 10 year old to be pregnant? Emphatically no. But if it happens, you have to deal with what IS, not what you wish it was.

I know that you support a grown woman's desire to do what she feels is right with a pregnancy. And I'm guessing that you probably feel that the right should be stretched to include the 16-18 year olds too. The sticking point is the very young age, right?

I understand that. A 10 year old should be riding her bicycle and worrying about passing the math test, not having to decide what to do with a pregnancy. But again, the IS versus the Wants.

I guess for me it comes down to the fact that she has to live with the results the rest of her life, regardless of who makes the decision, so she should have the deciding say.

Many of us who are pro-choice forget I think that there are people, even as young as 10, who really, really see a fetus as a baby whom an abortion murders. People who believed it at 10 and who still believe it at 20 and 30. It's hubris to think you know what your child's values will be as an adult.

Edited to add: It was evident that the 10 year old in question did feel that way, and considering that her family also felt that way as adults, it is naive to think that she would have not been emotionally and physically violated by a coerced abortion, and that it would have "been OK" when she was "a grown up and able to think for herself."

Surreal

It really depends on the state, but none of them think that a 12 year old is ready to take responsibility for herself. If the parents wouldn't provide care, then they'd end up in foster care.

Rosemaery Lorefield

I know Here is one:
Coercion generally means to impose one's will on another by means of force or threats. Coercion may be accomplished through physical or psychological means. It may occur in a variety of contexts, such as unfair trade practices, which prohibits coercion to sell insurance in most states.

Definitions vary by state and federal laws. For example, one state defines coercion as a crime when a person compels or induces a person to engage in conduct which the latter has a legal right to abstain from engaging in, or to abstain from engaging in conduct in which he has a legal right to engage, by means of instilling in him a fear that, if the demand is not complied with, the actor or another will cause physical injury to a person or cause damage to property.

Rosemaery Lorefield

I think this should be called something other than emancipation, since the general term is regarded as legally separated from the parents. Medical separation is something else, IMO.

Surreal

I totally agree.

I would assert that the reason for this above and beyond the way people empathize with the situation is that there is no good answer.

You have a person with an established life and you have what will become a person if nothing interferes. That's an essential conflict of rights. Somebody is going to lose out.

Personally, I feel like the established life gets priority until the third trimester, at which point only death or injury should negate the rights of the fetus.

My biggest concern is that the choice should be between the pregnant girl/woman and her doctor. Not decided by a bunch of guys down in DC who can't even find a woman for a "women's reproductive" panel and who (like in MI) think vagina is too obscene for mixed company. I wouldn't trust those guys to make a decision about my dinner, much less anything that counted.

Asher Bertrand

I just try to remember where my head was at when I was 10 and how differently I thought of things then versus now. I made bad decisions about what magazines to buy then or socks to wear then. I did really, REALLY dumb things. Thankfully, none of them had really long-term consequences. When I headed down that road, my family reined me in. Thank god they did, and those were with relatively small things. I admit to not getting why something with monumental consequences should be treated as more hands-off. Still conflicted.

I'm glad it wasn't me in that room with the family, Surreal. I don't know how I would have dealt with the aftemath.

Rosemaery Lorefield

It's not just about what we think a 10 year old should be doing. It's that most people do not believe that a 10 year old is capable of understanding the implications of pregnancy and motherhood well enough to make that decision.

You keep turning it around to the emotional side of things, but there *has* to be room for rational thought in this process.

Chandra Masala

Just gotta point out, if you're only looking at decades, this is true. But if you cover the span of centuries (and thus,changing attitudes toward what is perceived as adulthood), the age of puberty has drastically decreased. Menstruation at 12 is not the norm when you consider the total average.

Changing Biology: Age at First Menstruation » Sociological Images
(And I'm sure anyone else can find other resources on this)

And it is due, in part, to better healthcare, more sedentary lifestyles, changing in eating habits, climate, etc, etc.

Rosemaery Lorefield

I agree with that except that this law wasn't meant to protect women or girls from bureaucrats, the bureaucrats are the ones who took the decision out of the hands of the family, and placed it into the hands of young girls who may already have shown to not make the best decisions.
The decision should be between the girl, her doctor and her family, IMO.

Surreal

I get what you're trying to say, but I sincerely doubt that a parent laying out all the options and their consequences is going to come under coercion.

Even adding fundie nutjobs to the mix probably only means that abortion as an option would go away. Legislative coercion basically. That already exists to some extent simply because for a large number of women/girls, there is no provider in their region.

Rosemaery Lorefield

I'm not really convinced of that yet because I cannot find the damned definition for Michigan lol.
Besides that, there are a couple of scenarios here where I think this law can be dangerous to parents.
A. Parents pressure girl (or not) and she gets an abortion. She regrets it, blames her parents and sues. This is now a criminal offense, so what, parents go to jail? What would be the burden of proof for something like that?
B. Some teens are douches. They sue their parents for not getting them a damn gameboy or whatever they call it, so why not for coerced abortion.

Even if neither of these scenarios ever result in a criminal trial or investigation, it's one more liability held over parent's heads.

(As for B., I was that dickhead kid for a while. I did whatever the hell I could to bend my parents to my will, short of actual charges or formal accusations, but there are kids worse than I was :\ This seems to be entirely within the realm of reality to me)

Chandra Masala

Having sex and having children are adult privileges.If someone wants those privileges, then they can also take the responsibilities that accompany it.

If I had to deal with a teenage pregnancy issue, whether it be a son or daughter, I'd have to ascertain whether or not it was consensual (depending on the age, situation, etc), and if it was consensual, I'd give one of two options. 1. Have an abortion, stay at home and continue living as a somewhat normal childhood, or 2. Get married to the partner, and raise the child together. Whether or not they'd have to move out or move the partner in, is an issue of geography. I'd still assist with financial support, but they would have to make a visible effort to stay on their feet. I wouldn't enable them to continue living with the privileges of childhood by relying solely upon the parents for everything when they made the decision to be an adult.

But I doubt I'd ever deal with this situation. Cuz I'm raising my kids in a Pakistani jungle where they will never see a non-blood related human face until they turn 21.

-- And I do agree with pancake that kids are given mixed messages. You're not able to consent to getting a tattoo, but you're able to consent to sex or be a parent? Last time I looked, being a parent was a far greater and more demanding commitment than having a tattoo or being able to bring advil to school.

Surreal

My experience suggests differently (I lived 10 years in Ypsilanti recently btw), but please do post some links... I'm always up for reading.

Even if neither of these scenarios ever result in a criminal trial or investigation, it's one more liability held over parent's heads.

Ack! Be glad you weren't my kid. My son (he's 30 now) says I was the most frustrating mom to manipulate because I was as slippery as an eel

But I do know that there are some kids (and parents) that nothing will help except separation (or duct tape).

Surreal

Just FYI, I'm pretty sure there is no state in the US that allows anyone younger than 14 to get married, regardless of parental consent.

Chandra Masala

That's why I plan on having my children born here, then air lifted to complete, sex segregated safety.

Muwahhaa

pancake

I agree, I was fascinated by the concept of emancipation at conception and what that means going forward. Is it permanent? If they give up the child for adoption are they still emancipated? I have been doing some very unscientific research on it last night and today.

It appears that in some (most?) states a teen must be at least 16 to apply for emancipation and pregnancy is not one of the criteria they can use.

Understanding Emancipation of Minors

Now, there are references to teens being emancipated when it comes to the medical decisions regarding their pregnancy and child, but nothing so far about what happens outside of the medical decisions. Medical emancipation I guess?

https://www.ohiobar.org/ForPublic/Re...anUse-255.aspx

Issues for Minors Seeking Emancipation from Parents | The People's Law Library

I'm over thinking this, a long standing habit I'm unlikely to ever break, but I keep picturing at 14 year old mother who needs HER mother's consent to go to a tanning bed LOL.

__________________

Surreal

We have different rules for preventing harm than for dealing with existant harm.

Surreal

We could just send them to a home for wayward girls.

Magdalene Asylum

Kokoro Fasching

At 12, I am pretty sure that they would be placed in foster care. I was emancipated at 16. They did not place me in foster care since I was living with my sister, but by being emancipated, I was eligible for public assistance, and was legally allowed to enter into contracts.

By the time I was 17, I was living on my own, going through High School and working 3 jobs to keep it all going. The state did want to try and force me to take a shortened HS path, but thankfully the school counselor was on my side and said it was better for me to be allowed to take the normal 4 year path. It was important for me to be the first in my family to go through and complete high school.

By being emancipated though, I was able to sign my own wavier allowing me to join the Army Reserves at 17, and take the split option training so I did boot camp one summer, and AIT the next summer.

And I still graduated 13th in a class of 685! *is justifiably proud of that* I could have been 1st, but senior year I got infected with the seniors party and relax illness, and fell back some.

Chandra Masala

Or juvenile hall?

Rosemaery Lorefield

LOL over thinking maybe, but a good point!