quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In all 50 states, sexual activity with underage children is illegal. Also, every state mandates that if a healthcare worker has reason to suspect that an underage girl is being sexually abused, they are required by law to report that information to a designated law enforcement or child protective services agency. That agency is then responsible to investigate the possibility that the child may be the victim of sexual abuse or statutory rape.
Because the pregnancy of an underage girl is evidence that she is the victim of sexual abuse, any healthcare worker who has contact with a pregnant underage girl has an obligation to initiate a report to the state.
The important point here is that the healthcare worker is required to report the incident, not investigate it. The responsibility of determining whether or not the circumstances that led to this girl's pregnancy are criminal lies solely with the state agency to which the report is mandated.
Additionally, the fact that a minor girl may be lawfully allowed to have an abortion or secure birth control without her parents being informed is irrelevant. The law still mandates reporting of the sexual activity to the state.
Another quote:
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Another educational opportunity relates to the nation's 16,000 school districts. It is well known that many of them allow Planned Parenthood and similar organizations to come on campus and teach sex ed or provide counseling. In addition, many school districts refer their students to these types of family planning organizations.
We have already completed a nationwide direct mail campaign to inform every one of these school districts about the legal exposure they have created for themselves by associating with these organizations. They need to know that should the organization in question provide services to an underage student without reporting to the state, the school district could be brought into any subsequent litigation.
Note it's a pdf file. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posts: 7030 | Registered: Aug 2001 | IP: Logged This is a smart approach by the pro-life movement. Go after the process legally and by letting schools know they could be held liable.
They did an investigation by calling abortion clinics and asking questions.
quote: We have over 800 tape recordings that show how Planned Parenthood and NAF abortion workers secure business from victims of statutory rape by undermining parental authority, encouraging children to lie and promising minors that their employees will ignore mandatory reporting laws. Hundreds of Planned Parenthood clinic and National Abortion Federation clinic employees have been caught on tape expressing their willingness to conceal the statutory rape of a 13-year-old girl by a 22-year-old man. Even though many of these Planned Parenthood and NAF employees openly acknowledged that statutory rape is a crime and that they are required by law to report it, they made it clear that they do not abide by the law.
I have some personal involvement in a case that is ongoing (therefore I'm prohibited from talking about it in detail) which involves a clinic that falsified reports and endangered the life of a patient. (I'm not the patient or the provider, if you're wondering!) As it looks right now, there is a strong chance the clinic will lose its license and the doctor is facing criminal charges.
I never gave any consideration to the statutory rape issue, it's very interesting.
GAH! I hit post too soon. Anyway, my point is that I think the best way to get anywhere in the pro-life movement is to do things legally, orderly, and use the current systems of law. That's what the case we're involved in is doing, and while it's slow and frustrating, it's perfectly legal and proper and will get results much better than picketing or throwing eggs at the doctor will.
Sorry - this isn't an abortion thread. *hushes*
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sorry - this isn't an abortion thread. *hushes* --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Good idea. It scarcely need be said that most Planned Parenthood employees would find clear cases of statutory rape as objectionable as you yourself would.
It is also quite possible that many PP employees don't see borderline cases of statutory, such as sex between an 18- and 16-year-old in some states, as deserving the serious criminal penalties it entails, especially when people are in love. Also, there are rules of confidentiality that hold between health providers and patients. This stuff about statutory seems to be a little-known exception. I had certainly never heard of it.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, but it's pretty clear that this organization has done the research they need to as applies to state laws on reporting. The investigated every single state and sent FOIA requests to determine the level of compliance.
I would say, they have their facts pretty straight.
And I disagree with your statement, on the basis that too much evidence was gathered that directly contradicts your assertion that Planned Parenthood finds statutory rape objectionable. Certianly they didn't think they needed to report it.
Your statement that they may not determine "borderline" cases when people are in love to be statutory rape is irrelevant. They don't get the make that call. It's their job to report, regardless of what they think the circumstances are.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:And I disagree with your statement, on the basis that too much evidence was gathered that directly contradicts your assertion that Planned Parenthood finds statutory rape objectionable. Certianly they didn't think they needed to report it.
A doctor might find drug use objectionable, but his confidentiality arrangement with his patients prevents him from turning them in if they tell him that they use drugs.
posted
We need mack, CT, and other health providers to chime in here and see if they interpret the mandatory reporting laws the same way.
Since I'm not one, I don't know if everything in this report is correct. I mean, they're obviously biased being pro-life and while I agree with their stance I do want to make sure that what they're asserting is accurate.
If it is, then this is quite a good strategy for them.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
If they weakened the statutory laws in a lot of states, I would have no problem with this, and I don't think many PP workers would either. But you can understand that maybe some people might consider it unjust if it's illegal for a high school senior to have sex with his sophomore girlfriend.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
In every state in the US the age of consent is within high school age. In most it encompasses a good half of high school, at least for people of similar age. And in some, such as my own state of missouri, anyone from 14 to 20 can have sex with anyone else from 14 to 20, which encompasses pretty much all of high school.
Anyone who falls into the age of consent laws isn't being de facto abused by having sex or becoming pregnant.
quote:For an underage girl to seek birth control information or paraphernalia, treatment for a sexually transmitted disease, a pregnancy test, an abortion, or abortion referral is evidence of sexual activity. Knowledge of this by someone who is a mandated reporter compels that person to file a report with the state for an investigation into whether or not she is the victim of child abuse.
Fugu has a point with age of consent. If the child is below the age of consent, then you are mandated to report. If a teen is of age (of consent) then you don't report anything unless the teen reports being abused by a caretaker. So notifying DCYF about a teen inquiring about anything sexual would be ridiculous and would create a problem about crying wolf. Workers would have an incredibly hard time responding and investigating in a timely manner when hit with a glut of cases--because they WOULD be. Teens are naturally curious and WILL ask questions and if their questions are reported to a state agency...sweet jebus, that would be a mess and counterproductive to helping teens in trouble.
If a teen not of age reports having sex with an adult, then it must be reported to the police.
quote:For the mandated reporter, his or her only duty is to report the incident not investigate it, ignore it, make assumptions or draw conclusions. Even in circumstances where a mandated reporter has a reasonable belief – or actual knowledge – that (a) the girl's sexual partner is also a minor or that (b) the girl's parents already know about the situation, a report to the state is still legally required.
Not quite true, things seem to have been twisted. You are mandated to report abuse. You are not mandated to report an activity that has one cause of being abuse among many other causes. Unless you have something else to go on--you know the girl has an adult boyfriend, or if she tells you this, or if she informs you of abuse--you are not mandated to report, because in effect, you're only reporting that this teen has had or is wanting to engage in sex.
quote: A person is guilty of the felony of aggravated felonious sexual assault if such person engages in sexual penetration with another person under any of the following circumstances:
(j) When, except as between legally married spouses, the victim is 13 years of age or older and under 16 years of age and: (1) the actor is a member of the same household as the victim; or (2) the actor is related by blood or affinity to the victim. (k) When, except as between legally married spouses, the victim is 13 years of age or older and under 18 years of age and the actor is in a position of authority over the victim and uses this authority to coerce the victim to submit. (l) When the victim is less than 13 years of age.
So in this case...if the teen at the clinic is 15 or younger and pregant--you report it (unless said teen is legally married o_O ). However, you talk to the teen about the mandated reporting FIRST. Explain the law, explain mandated reporting, explain why you believe you have to report it. The teen may be able to tell you the father and his age. She may give permission to notify her parents. If not, you most likely will have to report it to either the police or DCYF.
But if the teen is 16 or older, unless she says she's pregnant or sexually curious as the result of abuse (as in, a person in a position of authority is the father, or has coerced her into asking into sex education paraphernalia), there isn't anything to report to the state.
Posts: 14745 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
First, Belle, I whole heartedly agree that the way anyone will get anywhere with the Sex Ed/Abstinence and Abortion debates is to take them away from the grandstanders, politician, and media hogs and turn them over to call rational people who want to solve this debate in a legal responsible way.
For the most part I applaude this manuever as such a logical, productive idea, and not a chance to get someone's name on the news.
My fear is for the child, just as I know most everyone is.
The argument they seem to be making is that, "If a child knows that getting information on sexual protection, contraceptives, abortion or STD's, or getting treatment for the same will be reported to the police, then under age kids will stop having sex."
I find that hard to believe.
I fear that young kids who have had sex will avoid getting information that can help them, even deture them from future sexual promiscuity, for fear that they will be arrested, or that their "Love!!!" will be thrown in jail.
What man capable of abusing the trust of a child would not scare the child from going to a clinic for treatment when they know that it will be reported. "Don't worry. You'll get better. I've had VD for years. Don't go to the clinic, they'll come and arrest uncle joe, take him away, and everyone will know what a slut you really are."
What 18 year old boy will get the medical attention they need when they fear it will wind them up in prison.
What mother of 17 will get the prenatal care she needs if going to the doctor will insure the slim chance that the father will stick around.
Much of this is not relevant. However, if you make even inquiry into sex a cause for crimminal investigation, then rumor, guess work, and fear will rule.
Doctor/Patient priviledge was not created to keep the police in the dark. It was created to insure everyone seeks the health care they need, and doesn't spread illness and disease out of fear of prosecution. It is good for society. This idea endangers it.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
