NCJ Number
118011
Journal
Hastings Law Journal Volume: 40 Issue: 1 Dated: (November 1988) Pages: 169-202
Date Published
1988
Length
34 pages
Annotation
The landmark decision of Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), elevated a woman's right of procreative choice to constitutional dimensions, yet it did not address the extent to which this right applied to minors.
Abstract
Many State legislatures responded to Roe by enacting laws that mandate parental involvement in pregnant minors' abortion decisions. California's Parental Consent Statute requires unemancipated minor women to obtain the consent of one parent for an abortion, but provides a judicial bypass alternative for mature minors and for immature minors whose best interests are furthered by a confidential abortion. This statute raises the profound dilemma of the proper ordering of the interests of the adolescent, her family, and the State. The Parental Consent Statute cannot be justified by its interests in promoting family communication, protecting immature minors from uninformed abortion decisions, or protecting minors' health, therefore it should be permanently enjoined from enforcement. 233 footnotes.