One year ago, Congress defunded public media. Now that we're 100% community funded, please become a sustaining member or increase your existing membership today.
This is an archival story that predates current editorial management.
This archival content was written, edited, and published prior to LAist's acquisition by its current owner, Southern California Public Radio ("SCPR"). Content, such as language choice and subject matter, in archival articles therefore may not align with SCPR's current editorial standards. To learn more about those standards and why we make this distinction, please click here.
Anti-Choicers Attempt to Put Parental Notification Initiatives on the Ballot AGAIN
Photo by ElvertBarnes via Flickr
There's an election coming up, and you know what that means -- it's time to waste Californian's time and money by forcing us to consider initiatives that we've already voted on!
This time around, if anti-choicers have their way, we are going to vote for the fourth time since 2005 on parental notification for minors seeking an abortion. I'm exhausted just typing that, because I've typed it so many times in the past. You know, the past -- when Californians voted the measure down. Three fucking times.
The proponents of the measure are actually trying to get signatures for two separate initiatives that are almost identical. Both require that parents of girls under the age of 18 be notified in writing if the girl seeks an abortion. The girl could get a waiver by going before a judge (because we all know how much kids love to talk to strange adults about their sex lives!) or by getting written proof of parental abuse (also an easy conversation for a teen: "hey Uncle Bob, can you write a letter to a judge saying that my dad beats the shit out of me so I can get this abortion that I need?").
The only difference between the two initiatives is that one would require that the girl wait 48 hours after her parents are notified to get the procedure. So she has time to think about whether this is what she really wants.
Anyway, once again, this is an unfortunate waste of everyone's time, and I, for one, am insulted that the people behind it are delivering such a slap in the face to voters. Maybe they're hoping that we'll forget that we already voted this down? Or maybe they think if they just explaaaain it to us a little diiiiiifferently, we'll fiiiiinally understand why they're sooooo on target. When actually, what's more on target is making sure teenagers get appropriate medical care. On time. When they need it. Rather than, you know -- illegal abortions.
One year ago, Congress voted to defund public media, eliminating a critical $1.7 million from our budget every year going forward. But they couldn’t silence us, and we’re not going anywhere. LAist is now 100% community funded and that means we’re taking our future into our own hands and turning to you to keep local reporting strong.
You come to LAist because you want independent reporting and trustworthy local information. Our nonprofit newsroom doesn’t answer to shareholders looking to turn a profit. Instead, we answer to you and our communities. We are free to follow facts wherever they lead and to hold power to account without fear or favor. Our only loyalty is to our readers and listeners and our mission: to inform, engage, and strengthen Southern California’s communities.
If this story helped you, please become a monthly member today to help sustain this mission. It just takes 1 minute to donate below.
You come to LAist because you want independent reporting and trustworthy local information. Our nonprofit newsroom doesn’t answer to shareholders looking to turn a profit. Instead, we answer to you and our communities. We are free to follow facts wherever they lead and to hold power to account without fear or favor. Our only loyalty is to our readers and listeners and our mission: to inform, engage, and strengthen Southern California’s communities.
If this story helped you, please become a monthly member today to help sustain this mission. It just takes 1 minute to donate below.
Senior Vice President News, Editor in Chief
