Hostile Amendments to RHPPA: Judicial Review

The risk of trying to pass a completely reasonable, up-to-date abortion law through the New York senate (or any senate) is that hostile lawmakers will get their hands on the law and castrate it. This castration will come in the guise of “hostile amendments.” In the case of a pro-choice law such as RHPPA, these might include antiquated and patriarchal requirements such as: judicial review, parental consent, mandatory counseling, parental notification period, waiting period.

Each of these extraordinary requirements would prove detrimental to the basic fairness and functioning of RHPPA, so over the next few weeks I will tackle them one at a time.

Welcome to the post wherein we discuss:

Judicial Review!

Summary: Judicial Review is often required if a teen is unable to receive parental consent (which happens mostly when there is fear of abuse). Of course, most pregnant teenage girls are just thrilled to trek to a courthouse and stand in front of an (often male) judge to explain why they should be allowed to have an abortion.

Issues:
1. Such a law creates a Risk of Delay:
• Some teenagers, lacking proper sex ed, may not realize they are pregnant right away.
• 86% of all counties in this country have no abortion provider. Teenagers from more rural communities will have to travel great distances and interrupt schooling and work schedules to see a judge.
• Judicial permission risks causing a delay in getting an abortion, which threatens a teenager’s physical and emotional health as an earlier abortion is safer.
• Example: Court proceedings in Minnesota routinely delayed abortions by more than one week, and sometimes up to three weeks. (Planned Parenthood)

2. The law imposes unnecessary stress and psychological burdens:
• While a majority of young women (61% in a 1991 survey) involve at least one parent, teenagers afraid of abuse frequently are unable to tell their parents.
• Judicial reviews take place during school hours when, paradoxically, teenagers will need parental consent to miss school. Proceedings can take from one to three weeks to complete, requiring lengthy absences.
• For a teenager who already lacks a familial support system, traveling to court and appearing in front of a judge can cause unneeded psychological and emotional stress to her situation.

3. Judicial rulings are arbitrary and vary by state:
• A May 28, 1992 article in the New York Times reported: “One Toledo judge [in 1991] denied permission to a 17 1/2-year-old girl, an “A” student who said she wanted an abortion because she was not financially or emotionally prepared for college and motherhood at the same time… In denying her petition, the judge told the girl’s lawyer that she had “not had enough hard knocks in her life.” Another Ohio 17 1/2-year-old was denied consent last year because she had not started paternity proceedings against the father of her 3-month-old son.”
• Individual states apply the law differently. This erratic application proves that the law is largely driven by regional bias:
• In Minnesota, the federal district court found that the state courts “denied only an infinitesimal proportion of the petitions brought since 1981″
• A study in Massachusetts found that only nine of the 477 abortion requests studied had been denied.
• An Ohio report found that the percentage of requests granted ranged from 100 percent to 2 percent, depending on the county.
• In Indiana, lawyers often refer teens to go out of state, because local judges will refuse to hold the hearing or are known to be anti-abortion.