Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well then let the doctor bill the patient and not the patient's parents.
Not a problem, Many of the procedures that the parents are so ballistic about are either performed at free clinics, or are so inexpensive that the doctor or clinic would gladly waive the charges rather than go to war against the parents.
Sailordave- Please note that in my previous response I never said that parents should not be involved in their child's medical needs. I just think parents shouldn't have complete control over their kids medical decisions, they should make the choices WITH their child not FOR their child. What about those parents that deny their kids medical intervention because of religious views? Do you think that was in the best interest of the child? Just because one is a parent does not always mean they know or do what's best. Let's say my mother had refused my scoliosis surgery. I'd be twisted like a pretzel by now and, at best, have severe breathing problems. All I'm saying is I don't think having to get permission is such a big deal, most kids WANT their parents involved if their is a serious medical issue. I think it's better if parents talk to their kids about why it's important for them to be involved, and not force/coerce the child into giving consent. Hmmm I have so much more I want to write but I'd probably take up 5 pages if I tried lol.
......However, exceptions were made for abortions. Funny how a hospital can't even give a child stitches for a small cut without parent or guardian permission but a strip joint abortion clinic can perform a medical proceedure on her without any parent or guardian ever finding out. .......
Very few states allow abortion without parental consent/notification. That
said, I would wager a guess that a desperate young woman could find a way
to "prove" her age or present her "parent" or "guardian" for consent.
Why bother, Planned Parenthood was caught on video tape telling a girl, posing as an underage teenager, that they weren't going to obey the law and report this case of statuatory rape. They aren't above breaking the law and health code violations in order to abort a baby.
Location: Moved to town. Miss 'my' woods and critters.
25,464 posts, read 13,574,744 times
Reputation: 31765
Quote:
Originally Posted by maja
The other day I went to establish an OnLine Medical Records Access Account for myself and my daughters (9 & 7 yrs.). I was informed that I would only be able to access my childrens' medical records until they were 12 years old. After that I would need their "permission" to view their medical information due to their legal right to privacy! I was blown away! I assume this has to do with the "right" of girls to have abortions without their parents' notification as we live in California and this issue was recently on the ballot. (People were trying to overturn it but failed.) This is so incredible to me; especially since I was recently in getting a mammogram and noticed the sign that said that anyone under the age of 18 must be accompanied by a parent or guardian! What in the he** is going on??? Is it just California or is this the same all over the country? I am really interested in hearing from other parents. If you live in California, were you aware of this? If you live out of state, do you know if its the same where you live? Does anyone else think this is the most absurd thing in the world??? I mean we're talking TWELVE YEARS OLD - not even sixteen!
Again, nowhere in the OP's post is there any reference to 'lack of communication' between her and her children. Nowhere. The question remains, since when does the state have the right to deny parents access to their child's medical records. As much as I detest 'assuming' anything, in this case I will make an exception and assume that the OP and her children are on speaking terms.
My objection to this law, is just that, an objection to a law that denies parental control and knowledge concerning their child's health. I fail to see a few of the posts here taking this into consideration. Again, the OP is asking about the law. I would hope that the Op can approach her children and explain the situation to them and the need for their cooperation, but that is not the OP's comment. I believe she is objecting to the law.
Why bother, Planned Parenthood was caught on video tape telling a girl, posing as an underage teenager, that they weren't going to obey the law and report this case of statuatory rape. .
Do you believe that in every single case of pregnancy (or casual sex, for that matter) by an under age girl with a man over the age of 18, there needs to be a prosecution for statuatory rape, and a conviction, and sentenced to the maximum sentence provided by law? Why don't you volunteer to work at PP, and infiltrate them as an undercover agent, and turn a weekly list over to the prosecutor of everyone underage who comes in there and requests birth control pills, so the police will interrogate her and get all those rapists off the streets for good, and make them put signs in their front yards for the rest of their lives? Aren't you disobeying the law, by failing to do everything in your power to bring these criminals to justice? You know they are going into the PP office---why don't you report them?
Yes, I realize that. My response was mainly to the posters who basically said they would force/manipulate their kids into giving them permission, I should've clarified.
Because we don't have Planned Parenthood offices in my city, thank God. The undercover video I talked about was an undercover girl who posed as a minor saying she was pregnant for someone much older than her. In the state where the video was made, it is a law that abortion providers are to report to the authorities cases of statuatory rape or incest. The Planned Parenthood clinic choose not to. I'll find the video and link it here.
Buit PP did not violate that law unless A) the girl was under 14 and B) they knew it. If she was actually under 14, her presence in the PP clinic would have been child abuse on the part of whatever agency placed her in the dangerous position of acting as an undercover agent. If she was not under 14, PP is not required to report anything.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
