I'm appalled

Post by **Ddrak** » Fri Mar 25, 2005 11:58 am

http://illinoisleader.com/news/newsview.asp?c=23788

I'm amazed that can be allowed to happen.

Dd

Post by **Relbeek Einre** » Fri Mar 25, 2005 12:06 pm

Yeah, I heard about this one last night. I'm curious what the charge was. Disorderly conduct, I'd imagine, which is fair. But the actions of the clinic's employees were appalling.

Post by **Relbeek Einre** » Fri Mar 25, 2005 12:14 pm

CAVEAT: I've seen stories like this before which turned out to be utter bullshit - staged with the presence of a "patient" so that the confirmable facts check out. Which is why I'm taking this story with a grain of salt - for now. It could be true - things like this have certainly happened before as well - and if it is, people should be fired, lose their medical licenses, etc.

Kulaf · Post by **Kulaf** » Fri Mar 25, 2005 12:17 pm

What actions by the clinic staff were appalling? I see no accurate timeline to follow in the story......the mother might actually have already been arrested by the time the girl asked them to send her a message. If the officer is correct that the parents have no right to interfere with the procedure....which I have no clue on IL law regarding this subject.....then them informing the mother that she has no rights is correct.

Embar Angylwrath · Post by **Embar Angylwrath** » Fri Mar 25, 2005 12:19 pm

This story was up on Drudge yesterday, but it was pulled. Don't know if that has anything to do with the veracity of the story, but Drudge usually lets these types of reports stay up for a few days.

Embar Angylwrath · Post by **Embar Angylwrath** » Fri Mar 25, 2005 12:31 pm

FYI

Illinois has a parental consent law on the books, but it currently is enjoined.

Embar Angylwrath · Post by **Embar Angylwrath** » Fri Mar 25, 2005 12:42 pm

Triple post!

Anyway.. seems the parental consent law was enjoined becuase it conflicts with certain rights for emancipated minors. In Illinois law, a minor is considered emancipated for the puposes of agreeing to medical procedures if that minor is pregnant.

410 ILCS 210/1

Makes no sense to me, but it looks like the clinic was correct in that the mother had no legal right to interfere in the abortion.

Another example of how something that is legal is still wrong.

superwalrus · Post by **superwalrus** » Fri Mar 25, 2005 12:58 pm

what the employees did was wrong (not letting the mother talk to the daughter)...

but the girl was 14 years old, she needed that abortion.

Walrus

Kulaf · Post by **Kulaf** » Fri Mar 25, 2005 1:01 pm

That would be a violation of the privacy of the patient if it was allowed without her consent. The girl knew her mother was there.....yet apparently only asked the nurses to give her mother a message....not a reqeust to allow her mother in come in. I would think the privacy rights of the patient here is of paramount importance.

Syeni Soulslasher MK6 · Fri Mar 25, 2005 1:02 pm

I don't see anything wrong with the actions of the clinic.. And IMO is almost exactly what they should have done IMO.

I am assuming that MOM was a tad hysterical at this point (adding to the confusion of the situation) she probably wasn't explaning the situation very clearly or calmly, understandable how ever does make it hard for staff to belive if they even understand.

I am guessing from there (clinic) point of view, Mom was trying to stop her child from doing something the child had every right to do, and as judging by how this story is wrote that the child did want to abort (probably to protect her BF) and perfectly within her right and probably much for the better considering her age.

Now if sudo grandma had intimidated said 14 year old into having the procedure I see a large civil suit aimed at sudo grandma and the school for releasing the child without verifying ID

The blame falls entirely on the school even if the 14 year old played along and said “Grandma”…….

Post by **Ddrak** » Fri Mar 25, 2005 1:13 pm

I can see Embar's point on this one - legal guardians (ie parents in this case) should have some influence on a minor's decision to undergo a voluntary medical procedure. That is a complete side issue in this case however.

However, it is interesting to see someone argue strongly on the rights on legal guardianship in one case and against it in another case. ;)

Dd

Syeni Soulslasher MK6 · Fri Mar 25, 2005 1:19 pm

I don't believe parents should have any legal say in an issue like this...

Just offer there advise to the child, it however is ultimately the child’s decision since after all they are the ones that have to live with that decision.

I would sooner see it as appropriate for children to get parental consent to fuck then abort.

Post by **Ddrak** » Fri Mar 25, 2005 1:24 pm

I just see it from a purely legal standpoint - a minor has no rights to make legal decisions for themselves. If you start meddling with that then you get into a huge can of worms.

Dd

Syeni Soulslasher MK6 · Fri Mar 25, 2005 1:29 pm

Ddrak wrote:I just see it from a purely legal standpoint - a minor has no rights to make legal decisions for themselves. If you start meddling with that then you get into a huge can of worms.

Dd

I understand what your saying DD.
However that can has already been open for a long time.
For example for crimes under certain circumstances children get tried as adults.
I am more for children being held accountable then children being glorified pets..

I wish it wouldn't have to boil down to a this or that debate, however murky middle is just as ugly.

Post by **Ddrak** » Fri Mar 25, 2005 1:35 pm

Good points Syeni.

Aabe · Post by **Aabe** » Mon Mar 28, 2005 8:37 am

I wonder if the woman that posed as grandma got into any trouble for impersonating a relative to get a child "illeagally" released from school. <whacked on the back of the hand with a ruler or something>

Selur · Post by **Selur** » Mon Mar 28, 2005 11:23 am

The woman posed as the girl's grandmother? I'm a secretary at a junior high school and we never release a child to anyone but the parent/legal guardian or a person that the parent has given written permission to pick their child up. Oh, and our school board has also mandated that whoever is taking a child from school before dismissal time--whether they are the parent or not--they must present a state or government-issued photo ID. We don't even call the child down from their classroom until we have verified the person's identity.

This is why: About 10 years ago a 7-year old at an elementary school in the same district was released to her 18-year old brother who had no ID and who was never listed as an emergency/alternate contact. He came to pick her up saying she had a doctor's appointment, but later that day the police showed up and it turns out that the lecherous sumbitch had taken her home, beaten her up and molested her. The parents successfully sued the school district, and the woman who released that little girl to her brother without getting off her ass to make sure he had the authority to do so was fired.

In this case, though... I can't even imagine how the school's personnel released the girl to this lady. If I were the girl's parents I would be suing the school district for not doing their part of the legwork before releasing my child.

Selur · Post by **Selur** » Mon Mar 28, 2005 11:24 am

Also forgot to mention that I live and work in a near suburb of Chicago.

pen · Post by **pen** » Mon Mar 28, 2005 3:35 pm

Yet another indicator of why the youth in the country continue to struggle with drugs, violence, alcohol, etc. We push to further emancipate them from their parental figures at earlier and earlier ages. Kids & teens need more parenting and less individual rights imo.

I'm not going to comment on the rights of the mother over the rights of the unborn child. Thats a page 8'r for sure. My beef is with any legislation that further restricts parents from parenting. There are certainly holes in the story (such as whether the child had been through councilling regarding this choice). Her mother was barred from being a parent at a critical time - I have issue with that.

Aabe · Post by **Aabe** » Mon Mar 28, 2005 3:46 pm

Sounded like the parents were aware of the possible abortion plans or they wouldnt have run to the abortion clinic so quickly.

Also sounds like some CYA on the guys part with his momies help. (silly boy, if ya do the crime, be willing to do the time.) But he got lucky on this one. Girls parents didn't know about stale charges.

I am guessing that the parents held the statutory rape charge against daddy and possibly the daughter as some form of bargaining chip so the girl would deliver the baby.

If that is true, you can imagine the relationship dynamics going on behind the scenes.

Badboys mommy, Badboy, 14 yr girl, girls parents.
You could easily write a book with just those 5 as the characters.

Brell Rants

I'm appalled

I'm appalled

hmmm