Appeals court activates long-dormant abortion parental notification law in Illinois

"A  victory for Illinois parents and children"

Overshadowed by the Senate hearings on pro-choice Sonia Sotomayor's suitability to be a Supreme Court justice, a U.S. appeals court in Chicago on Tuesday gave new life to a long-dormant law that requires Illinois parents be notified when their minor daughter seeks an abortion.

The three-judge federal appeals panel lifted a permanent injunction imposed by federal district judge David Coar that had been the latest in a series of continuing roadblock to enforcing the parental notification law  passed in 1995.
The Illinois legislature originally passed a similar parental notification law in 1984, a decade after the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade and its companion case Doe v. Bolton legalized abortion for virtually any reason. That law was struck down by a court and the 1995 revision

lisa madiagn.jpg

Lisa Madigan

sought to remedy those objections.

Even though parental notification laws have been upheld as
constitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court, pro-choice activists have
sought to throw one wrench after another into the enforcement of the
law. Abetting opponents of parental notification was the Illinois
Supreme Court, which  refused for a decade to issue regulations that
would have defined how a minor could go to a judge to bypass the parent
notification requirement, thus stymieing enforcement of the law for a
decade.

Despite  overwhelming public support for parental notification--about
70 percent favor it--the abortion industry and its allies doggedly
fought the requirement. Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan and Cook
County State's Attorney Anita Alverez were in their official capacities
the  defendents in the case. (The attorney general routinely defends
legal challenges to state law, but in this case Madigan decided to
fight it.)

Many opponents of parental notification have argued that it imposes an
unconstitutional burden, even though it involves a child. In prior
cases, courts have held the countrary, that the state, while it has an
interest in protecting a woman's right to choose, also has an important
interest in the welfare of its children that justifies regulation of
abortions performed on minors.

The law's opponents have not at this moment said they would appeal to
the U.S. Supreme Court (how would a justice Sonia Sototmayor rule?),
but they reaffirmed their disdain of parental notification. (Notice
that the law does not require parental permission for an abortion to 
be performed on their daughter. It's only notification, but for some
rigid pro-choicers, that's even too much.) Lorie Chaiten, Reproductive
Rights Project Director for the ACLU of Illinois, said in a statement
that parental notification remains an "unnecessary" and "dangerous"
requirement. Such a law is not needed, she said, because abortion
providers have found that a pregnant girl usually notifies her parents
or a "trusted adult family member" anyway.

But the Thomas Moore Society, which helped defend the law, called the
decision a victory for Illinois parents and their children. Peter
Breen, the group's Executive Director and Legal Counsel, said, 
"Parental involvement laws enjoy overwhelming public support. These
laws promote the integrity of the family and ensure that parents are
consulted so that their children are not forced into an abortion
decision. A wealth of social science data indicates that parental
involvement laws lead to lower pregnancy rates, out-of-wedlock births
and abortions."

Comments

Leave a comment
  • 'These laws promote the integrity of of family' This quote is from your lame blog. When a young girl makes a decision to have sex and possibly get pregnant she earns the right to make related decisions like abortions. It is a 'family's' job to prevent the pregnacy. When they fail at this job they do not get the right to impose their beliefs on these young people and possibly ruin their lives. This law is just an attempt at control, plain and simple.

  • In reply to fmorelli:

    How would you feel if your daughter (or son) came home with a nose ring? Even those parents get notified. But not when a child has major surgery?? Whether or not you believe in abortion, a child is a child and sometimes they need help in deciding what is the best option.

  • There's an advertising campaign in England aimed at schoolchildren, it's called "An Orgasm A Day." Turns out, an apple a day isn't only unappetizing, it's not very fun:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/12/ogasm-a-day-campaign-dire_n_230221.html

    Looking back on my life, I wish I'd had more sex. I wish I hadn't made sex so important. It's not important. It's just sex.

    I wish I'd seen the adults and so-called authority figures for what they really were: fat, ugly and jealous has-beens who were jealous of our youth and appetite for sex, lots & lots of sex.

    Abortion is nothing more than a sex-hangover, like puking after a big night out. Doesn't make the fun less worth it, or necessary.

Leave a comment

  • ChicagoNow is full of win

    Welcome to ChicagoNow.

    Meet our bloggers,
    post comments, or
    pitch your blog idea.

  • Advertisement:
  • Fresh Chicago News

  • Subscribe to The Barbershop

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

  • Dennis Byrne’s Facebook Fan Page

  • Like me on Facebook

  • google-site-verification: googlefdc32e3d5108044f.html
  • Meet The Blogger

    Dennis Byrne

    Chicago Tribune contributing op-ed columnist and author of forthcoming historical novel, "Madness: The War of 1812." Reporter, editor and columnist for Chicago Sun-Times and Chicago Daily News. Freelance writer and editor.

  • Our National Debt

  • Twitter

  • Categories

  • Tags

  • Recent Comments

  • Monthly Archives

  • /Users/dennisby/Desktop/trailer.mp4
  • Latest on ChicagoNow

  • Advertisement: