Abortion Tourism Is Not Only Offensive, It Attacks Parental Rights

 

Apparently all the pro-life efforts to protect women and children in Texas is creating a new off shoot of the abortion industry in the Lone Star State – “abortion tourism.”  The Daily Caller has the details:

A 20-year-old student at the University of Texas at Austin has started a nonprofit organization to skirt a new state law that bans abortion after 20 weeks and requires abortion doctors to have hospital-admitting privileges within 30 miles of the abortion facility.

The student is Lenzi Sheible, reports The Texas Tribune. Her nonprofit is called Fund Texas Women. Notably, Sheible is seven months pregnant.

The new law, House Bill 2, went into effect Nov. 1.

In response to the law, Fund Texas Women pays travel expenses for women – and minor girls – to get to the abortion clinics which still exist in The Lone Star State. For women who have decided to get abortions after they are 20 weeks pregnant, the nonprofit pays to ship them to other states, including New Mexico and Colorado.

While trying to skirt one law Ms. Sheible is most likely skirting another as well.

As of January 2006 Texas requires parental consent before a woman under 18 years of age can obtain an abortion. A parent or legal guardian, with government ID, must accompany the minor patient to the office and sign a parental consent form prior to an abortion.  Abortion-giant Planned Parenthood already works to skirt that law by trying to teach young girls, some as young as 12 years old, how to skirt the law.

By taking minors across state lines Ms. Sheible and Planned Parenthood are avoiding Texas law which requires both parental consent as well as notification.  One destination of the law avoiders is New Mexico where parents have no rights under law when it comes to abortion of their young daughters the other is Colorado where only notice is necessary, not consent.

Texas legislators, representing the wishes of the large majority of citizens of that state, passed parental consent and notification laws to help ensure that a young girl in a difficult situation has the support she needs.  (New Mexico tried the same thing however abortion-profiteer Planned Parenthood tied the legislation up in the courts.)  Unfortunately efforts at the national level has either been stopped by a pro-abortion majority in Congress or ignored by a Republican majority.  As leading Democrats talk about a false war on women they continue their very real war on parents.  Parental rights are a very popular issue but routinely ignored by Congress – the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act should be a major piece of legislation being pushed by pro-life forces in Congress. 

The avenue the 113th Congress needs to pursue is passing legislation requiring parental notification. The problem is that many abortion clinics lure young girls from their home states that have parental notice laws to states where they can get abortions without their parents knowing. Often the man who gets a young girl pregnant takes her to the clinic. To counter this type of human trafficking they should reintroduce the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act.

A ruling by the Kentucky Court of Appeals highlights why this legislation is necessary.  In a 2-1 ruling in two Kentucky judges decided that young girls from other states may ask Kentucky judges to give them permission to have abortions without their parents’ knowledge or consent.  This means if a young girl in Indiana wants to avoid getting her parents permission, which is required by law in that state, they can go judge shopping in Kansas for a judge who will allow her to abort her unborn child and her parents need never know.  It is clearly in the role of the U.S. Congress to make sure that one state does not move to undermine the laws and parental rights of another state.

The Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act (CIANA) makes it a federal offense to transport a minor across state lines to obtain an abortion in circumvention of parental involvement laws in the minor’s home state. The bill would also require parental notification before an abortion is conducted on a minor from another state. The last time the House voted on this bill in 2006, it passed overwhelmingly by a vote of 264 to 153.

There is little doubt that if the bill passed it would be vetoed.  In 1996 Obama responded “No,” on a candidate questionnaire asking “Do you support parental consent/notification for minors seeking abortions?”  As state senator Obama voted “present” in 2001 on two parental notification bills. As U.S. Senator Obama voted “No” in 2006 on a bill requiring parents to be notified before their minor daughter got an out-of-state abortion, and he voted “No” in 2008 on a bill prohibiting the trafficking of minors from states with parental involvement laws to states without them.

However just because President Obama has little regard for the rights of states to pass laws that protect parents and children doesn’t mean Congress shouldn’t move to protect them.  That the Republicans failed to pass this common sense legislation the years they were in charge of both chambers of Congress and the Presidency speaks a lot to how they squandered those years.  If they are given a second chance, will they go for it and do the right thing or take the easier path and do nothing?