|
|
|
Original_Intent
SFN Regular
USA
609 Posts |
 Posted - 11/10/2006 : 20:55:59 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
LOL..... Want's the Donkey's handicap?
Peace
Joe |
 |
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2006 : 23:49:58 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Original_Intent
... Medical decisions, actually any decisions, about a minor child need to be done by the parents. If this is not the case, then the age of emancipation / adulthood needs to be lowered.
edited to add------
In certain cases the court should have the ability to step in where the child is endangered.
Peace
Joe
This was the talking point that sucked my brother into the ship of fools on this issue. We've had long discussions.
If that minor child were to carry that fetus to term, guess what? Barring unusual circumstances like a 10 year old or a mentally handicapped girl giving birth, the teen becomes an emancipated minor.
So if carrying the pregnancy to term qualifies you as emancipated, then it isn't that far of a stretch to allow that pregnant teen to make their own decision sans parents, to have the baby or to have an abortion. And much as it might piss you off as a parent to think the medical providers aren't snitching on the teen to you, the bottom line is once the teen is pregnant, her role as a dependent changes.
Edited to add, the court in Oregon has the final judgment, the teen has to be 16 and supporting one's self away from home is a criteria. But having the child qualifies the teen for welfare and she could live alone.
Still, as the parent of a 17 yr old, I know there is a time when kids become independent and it isn't necessarily on their 18th birthday. I was independent by the age of 15. I might have slept at home, but my parents had little say in what I did. My son probably won't be totally independent until he goes to college and lives away from home. |
| Edited by - beskeptigal on 11/12/2006 00:04:20 |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2006 : 05:46:10 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Original_Intent
Correct. Medical decisions, actually any decisions, about a minor child need to be done by the parents. If this is not the case, then the age of emancipation / adulthood needs to be lowered.
I this isn't what you meant, but taking your statement to it's logical conclusion would mean that a 15 year old boy could not go to an emergency room to get a band aid applied without the hospital being forced to contact his parents for permission.
If someone is old enough to be legally entrusted to make decisions about having sex, then they should also be entrusted to make decisions about their own body. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2006 : 07:53:58 [Permalink]
|
Mab, you have it right.
One issue with most of these so called conservatives is they want to control who is having sex with who, and when they are doing it.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Original_Intent
SFN Regular
USA
609 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2006 : 09:04:15 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by beskeptigal
quote:
Originally posted by Original_Intent
... Medical decisions, actually any decisions, about a minor child need to be done by the parents. If this is not the case, then the age of emancipation / adulthood needs to be lowered.
edited to add------
In certain cases the court should have the ability to step in where the child is endangered.
Peace
Joe
This was the talking point that sucked my brother into the ship of fools on this issue. We've had long discussions.
If that minor child were to carry that fetus to term, guess what? Barring unusual circumstances like a 10 year old or a mentally handicapped girl giving birth, the teen becomes an emancipated minor.
So if carrying the pregnancy to term qualifies you as emancipated, then it isn't that far of a stretch to allow that pregnant teen to make their own decision sans parents, to have the baby or to have an abortion. And much as it might piss you off as a parent to think the medical providers aren't snitching on the teen to you, the bottom line is once the teen is pregnant, her role as a dependent changes.
Edited to add, the court in Oregon has the final judgment, the teen has to be 16 and supporting one's self away from home is a criteria. But having the child qualifies the teen for welfare and she could live alone.
Still, as the parent of a 17 yr old, I know there is a time when kids become independent and it isn't necessarily on their 18th birthday. I was independent by the age of 15. I might have slept at home, but my parents had little say in what I did. My son probably won't be totally independent until he goes to college and lives away from home.
Ship of fools? The only fools are the ones that believe the states have the right to such an easy in into the family.
Fine, she carries it to term and becomes emancipated. She is not, however, emancipated when she becomes pregnant, or until she gives birth. How about auto-emancipation? As soon as she becomes pregnant, the family is no longer responsible for her. THey can kick her to the curb if they desire. How about auto-emancipation of encouragable toublemakers as well. This would have saved my mother a ton of money being required to help my brother out becuase he was such a PIA.
There is a difirence between emancipation and independence. That is a foolish comparrisoon.
So at 15 you were able to feed, cloth, and house yourself..... No.... Then you were not independent. Just because your parents were weak or lax, don't expect others to go quietly down that road.
Living on welfare is not independence. It is far past time for the state to step into this arena. Just as any company that recieves state support has to live to state standards, then those individuals should also.
The state needs to stay the hell out of the family.
Peace
Joe |
|
|
|
Original_Intent
SFN Regular
USA
609 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2006 : 09:06:17 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
Mab, you have it right.
One issue with most of these so called conservatives is they want to control who is having sex with who, and when they are doing it.
edited to add:
.... when the parents are responsible for them.
|
|
|
|
Original_Intent
SFN Regular
USA
609 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2006 : 09:12:47 [Permalink]
|
Looking at "age of consent" laws leaves me wondering.
It is amazing in some states that a child can consent to sex at as young as 12 to a person who is 16. However, if that person is 17, they cannot consent, and it is statutory rape.
That's just more typical FUBAR.
Peace
Joe |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2006 : 10:05:15 [Permalink]
|
You were once a teen OI, did your parents have any control over who you were having sex with?
The best a parent can hope for is to encourage responsible behavior. It is a pipedream to think teenagers won't have sex bexause you tell them not to.
Hell, there was a study not to long ago on teens who took those crazy "virginity" oaths. Not only were they having sex anyway, alot of them were having more oral and anal sex than their non-oath taking counterparts.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
JohnOAS
SFN Regular
Australia
800 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2006 : 15:53:59 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Original_Intent
Looking at "age of consent" laws leaves me wondering.
It is amazing in some states that a child can consent to sex at as young as 12 to a person who is 16. However, if that person is 17, they cannot consent, and it is statutory rape.
That's just more typical FUBAR.
I'm not sure there are any universally sensible age of consent laws. For any system you can put in place, there will be situations for which the laws will be inappropriate.
I generally think that the idea of different limits when one of the partners is significantly older is a good one, but when to have sex and whom to have it with is a very individual decision, and no legislation can possibly cover all the bases.
|
John's just this guy, you know. |
|
|
|
Mycroft
Skeptic Friend
USA
427 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2006 : 23:16:20 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
You were once a teen OI, did your parents have any control over who you were having sex with?
Parents have the same control as they do over any other kind of behavior. They have the ability to set rules, decide upon the consequences for breaking those rules, and they also have the ability to explain and discuss the reasons behind their rules.
While it may be true that a parent doesn't have the ability to prevent a child from doing something if they're really determined to do it, that's not the same as saying the parent has no control at all. A great deal depends on what kind of relationship you have with your child.
It's not a subject prone to absolutes either way.
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
