The San Francisco Chronicle today editorialized against Proposition 4, the Abortion Waiting Period and Parental Notification Initiative. The newspaper has editorialized against parental notification legislation in the past, and asserts that the reasoning they've used before holds true for this year's souped up version as well.

As we have said before, the arguments for parental notification may sound reasonable, but the real-world experience of the medical professionals who deal with scared pregnant teens suggest its requirements are unnecessary - and even insidious. - SF Chronicle

The paper's arguments can be similar to those they've put forth before because the legislation is nearly identical to Prop 73 and Prop 85, the two parental notification initiatives that California has already voted down. This year, though, the initiative adds one more "workaround" (in addition to a judicial bypass or a pre-acquired parental waiver) for a young woman who can't have her parents notified:

Once again, the architects of parental notification - which includes dedicated foes of abortion rights - have crafted exceptions that were designed to appease concerns, but are cumbersome to the point of cruelty for a teen in crisis. In the latest version, a physician could notify an adult relative other than a parent if the patient claimed physical, sexual or severe emotional abuse - and the doctor reported those allegations to law enforcement or Child Protective Services. - SF Chronicle

The editorial goes on to encourage a no vote, and break the initiative down into bite-sized pieces.

Photo by Made Underground via Flickr