Parental Involvement in California Makes a Comeback
I know what you’re thinking. You think that California has already gone down the tubes. You think that the formerly Golden state is tarnished with no hope of return to greatness.
Hold your horses right there!
A lot of you are familiar with California’s Conservative candidate for Governor, Assembly Tim Donnelly, who is taking our leftist-run state by storm. With Conservatives behind him, we stand strong and shout, “NOT ON OUR WATCH.”
Meet Tim Donnelly’s female counterpart, California Assemblywoman Shannon Grove, who isn’t going to let California be destroyed on her watch either. She is the author of California’s State Assembly Bill ACA 5, called “The Parental Notification, Child and Teen Safety, and Stop Predators Act,” which would prohibit a physician from performing an abortion on an un-emancipated minor unless the physician has delivered written notice to the parent of the minor, or until a waiver of that notice has been received from the parent or issued by a court. The measure would impose civil and criminal penalties for violation. I’ve attached the Factsheet for more information.
Assemblywoman Shannon Grove is slated to be heard in the Assembly Health Committee tomorrow, January 14, regarding her ACA. You can watch the committee live online here: http://www.calchannel.com/live-webcast/.
Tune in–you won’t want to miss seeing Assemblywoman Grove in action. I’ve seen her speeches and have spoken with her one-on-one. If you think Assemblyman Donnelly is one determined fired-up man to keep our country from continuing on a downward slope by starting his mission in California, you really cannot miss this incredibly dynamic woman on the floor of the California State Assembly.
Shannon’s office told me they anticipate she will be the first or second bill up, which would put her speech on the floor between 1:35 and 2:00 p.m., Pacific Time. The paragraphs below are based on what her office expects she’ll say in her Introductory Statement, but she might add more information our PolitiChicks’ readers would appreciate.
Getting a tattoo. Going to a tanning bed. Getting a body piercing. Traveling for field trips or sporting events. Receiving Tylenol at school. Purchasing violent video games. These are just some of the many things minors in the state of California are disallowed by law from participating in, or at the very least, disallowed without parental or guardian involvement.
It appears that we are all in agreement that minors do not have the emotional or physical maturity to make many important decisions on their own. But the lack of maturity and need for wise direction is only part of the reason I introduced ACA 5, “The Parental Notification, Child and Teen Safety, Stop Predators Act.” Every day, young girls are being taken for abortions by older men intent on keeping the abortion a secret from parents and law enforcement. As we speak, young girls are being trafficked on the streets of Los Angeles, San Francisco, Oakland, and other major California cities. We must put an end to this.
ACA 5 declares that the people of California have a compelling interest in protecting minors from the known risks of secret abortions, and in preventing sexual predators from using secret abortions to conceal the exploitation of minors. The motto of the California Assembly is “Legislatorum est Justas leges condere,” meaning “it is the duty of legislators to pass just laws.” ACA 5 does just that. I can think of nothing more just than protecting our young girls from the predators that prey on their innocence and vulnerability.
The following is a summary of the proposed bill:
ACA 5 (2013) – The Parental Notification, Child and Teen Safety, Stop Predators Act
Assemblywoman Shannon Grove (R-Bakersfield) – Assembly District
ACA 5, known as “The Parental Notification, Child and Teen Safety, and Stop Predators Act,” declares that the people of California have a “compelling interest in protecting minors from the known risks of secret abortions” and “preventing sexual predators from using secret abortions to conceal the sexual exploitation of minors.”
Every day, adult men around the state and country are sexually abusing young girls, often times forcing them to have an abortion without the knowledge of their parents or law enforcement.
More than 35 states currently have some version of a parental notification requirement. While California is not one of them, a majority of Californians favor such a law.
According to a 2009 survey by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC), 68% of Californians favor a state law requiring parental notification before a girl under 18 can get an abortion. According to PPIC, “majorities across party lines (55% Democrats, 66% independents, 77% Republicans), regions, and ethnic and racial groups favor a parental notification law. Latinos (81%) are the most likely group (70% Asians, 68% blacks, 58% whites) to support the idea.”
In 1987, the California state legislature passed and the Governor signed AB 2274, requiring consent from a parent/guardian or a court waiver before an abortion could be performed on a minor.
This bill was immediately challenged in court, receiving a preliminary injunction before the law was scheduled to take effect. After ten years of litigation, the law was eventually ruled unconstitutional by the California Supreme Court’s 4-3 decision in American Academy of Pediatrics v. Lungren (1997). The majority found that the bill infringed a minor’s right to privacy as they perceived it in Article 1, Section 1 of the California Constitution.
In his dissent, Associate Justice Stanley Mosk emphasized the arbitrary and inconsistent nature of this ruling, referencing several areas in current law in which minors are not afforded the same level of privacy as adults, stating “they are premised on a fundamental social tenet that children require protection against their own immaturity and vulnerability in making decisions that may have serious consequences for their health and well-being.” His examples include a minor’s inability to enter into marriage or other contract, obtain most medical or dental procedures without parental or court involvement, obtain a driver’s license, or get a permanent tattoo.
If passed by two-thirds of the legislature, ACA 5 will place a proposition on the November 2014 ballot giving the people of California the opportunity to amend the state Constitution to prohibit a physician from performing an abortion on a minor without first notifying that minor’s parent or guardian. ACA 5 does not require parental consent as did AB 2274, and includes exemptions from notification of a parent in cases of a medical emergency, by a judicial waiver, or with evidence of parental abuse.
Parental Notification Propositions like ACA 5 have been on the California ballot three times since the 1997 Supreme Court decision which overturned the 1987 parental consent law. They were: Proposition 73 (2005), Proposition 85 (2006), and Proposition 4 (2008). Despite more than $20 million dollars spent on deceptive campaigns to defeat them, they almost passed. Proposition 4 received 48.04% support.
It is the responsibility and duty of elected legislators to pass laws that protect the most vulnerable from those who would harm them. ACA 5 will do just that.
Since ACA 5 is a constitutional amendment, it will not be subject to California Supreme Court scrutiny as was the 1987 parental consent bill. ACA 5 will allow California voters to assist in stopping sexual predators from exploiting the young and vulnerable girls of California.
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Staff: Rob Smith
Sponsor: Californians for Parental Rights
Bill text and status: www.leginfo.ca.gov