I asked another question regarding whether or not minors should be able to receive B.C./abortions without parental consent, and the answers were pretty much 50/50 for each side-here is my next one:
If a minor still under her parents care chooses to get either one of these without her parents consent and something DOES go wrong, should the parents be able to sue the child for medical costs, mental anguish, etc? After all, by completely excluding the parents the teen and the Dr. are both volunteering the parents unwillingly and unknowingly to cover any medical, emotional and mental issues that may arise. Also, by allowing the child to bypass the parents on medical decisions even though their parents are the ones financially responsible, you are saying that the child is mature enough to make sound medical choices......so if they do that, shouldn't they be automatically emancipated if it negatively impacts the parents?
2007-10-22
02:54:11
·
5 answers
·
asked by
Sunny And '74
4
in
Pregnancy & Parenting
➔ Adolescent
If you can't 'force' her to have a baby, you can't 'volunteer' her parents to foot the bill if you have excluded them in ever major decision, right? It's like someone driving your car, wrecking it, and giving you the bill........except they chose to repair it in ways you would have never agreed to-and you are now responsible!
2007-10-22
02:55:44 ·
update #1
FYI, I am 22........and I WAS A TEEN MOTHER with an abusive father. I had my beautiful daughter at age 17, so I know more than many think I do about how a teen feels
2007-10-22
02:56:47 ·
update #2
Howie....as a fool does, you ignorantly exclude girls who are raped, and blow other theories to hell (the old BC arguemnent-"teens are going to do it even if they are taught abstinence!").......well if teens are going to 'do it anyways' no matter what parents want, then how is that the parents fault?
2007-10-22
04:06:01 ·
update #3