The Minnesota Republicans are continuing their assault on health care, now coming after local teens in an attempt to remove their ability to get abortions, birth control, or even a screening and treatment if they have a concern about STI’s. And if the teen has been raped, there would be almost no chance at a judicial bypass.
As Rachel Nygaard reports at Minnesota Progressive Project:
MN GOP’s bill, SF 1017, moves Minnesota from a ‘parental notification’ state to a ‘parental consent’ state – meaning that for a minor to obtain an abortion, they must obtain permission from their parents. There is an exception for incest, though only when raped by a relative nearer than a first cousin by blood and the victim would be forced to go in front of a judge and prove that incest occurred. The incest exception would NOT include step parents, step siblings or guardians and there is no exception for rape by a stranger. This bill effectively removes the judicial bypass mechanism implemented by Minnesota’s parental notification law, which enabled minors to obtain permission from a judge. This bill would not only force rape and many incest victims to confront their assailants to obtain permission for an abortion, they would have to obtain their permission for mental health counseling and other medical treatment.
SF 1017 will prevent youth from seeking health care services by removing the right to confidentiality. This right has been a cornerstone to improving the health of American teens.
Appreciate our work?
Vote now! And help Rewire earn a bigger grant from CREDO:
Anti-abortion activists believe that forcing children to talk to their parents for permission to get birth control keeps parents in the loop about their child’s well-being. Instead, it makes for teens who engage in riskier behavior and avoid treatment when they do eventually get sick. And to force a teen girl to prove to a judge that she was raped by a closely related blood relative to have an abortion? Or even worse, deny her an abortion if she was raped by a step-family member unless she tells another parent in order to get access?
The anti-choice say they want to protect children. How is this protecting them?