Jose Vasquez February 15th, 2012
Dear Friends,
On February 9, 2012, House Bill 51, Parental Notification Actwas heard by the House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee. Sponsored by Representative Alonzo BaldonadoHouse Bill 51 sought to require parental notification 48 hours prior to an abortion planned for an unemancipated minor. The bill was an attempt to insure parental involvement in the medical procedure. Opposition to the bill came from several sources including Planned Parenthood, the Unitarian Church, National Organization for Women, the Office of the State Attorney General.
Of particular interest were the comments by Representative Antonio “Moe” Maestas, a lawyer representing Albuquerque’s west side. Representative Maestas questioned the ability of the judiciary to fairly judge the issue and its becoming a campaign issue for judges, questioned confidentiality, the “criminalization” of abortions and the ensuing proverbial “back room” abortion and government’s inability to force a parent-child conversation.
The following are the issues addressed by Representative Maestas:
1. Questioning the competence of judges to judge on the issue of Parental Notification:
After asking what criteria would be used to determine what was “in the best interest of the child,” Representative Maestas said, “Judges are like us, divided on this issue. Some judges would rather throw away the robe rather than grant permission.”
2. Inappropriateness of use as a campaign issue:
“This would come up in the campaigns which would be inappropriate for a judge to say on the campaign trail how they would rule on a particular case. I think it would compromise the integrity of the judiciary.”
3. Lack of confidentiality, especially in a small town:
“I don’t see this ever happening, particularly in a small town.” Representative Maestas then compared having a judge rule on an abortion to a colleague’s divorce. “Within 12 hours was all over the Internet.” Because judgments have to be in writing, Representative Maestas gave the following as an example of a judgment never to be seen: “‘Because the eligible father is a golfing buddy of the Dad, I hereby grant the abortion’ - they are just not going to do that.
An ineffectual “criminalization” of abortion and comparison to the war on drugs:
“Because see, it’s just like the war on drugs. The government does not have a magic wand to solve some of these problems. We have these strict, strict drug laws so that people will stop taking drugs and it doesn’t stop people from - stop taking drugs. It just puts drug addicts in jail. So even if we had the authority to do this, it’s unconstitutional, even if we did, from a policy standpoint it’s probably not a good idea to criminalize abortion because is wouldn’t stop them from happening.”
Prompting illegal “back room” abortions:
“It would just make them more unsafe, make them illegal. People would try to perform them on themselves, or harm the baby after the baby is born or things like that. It’s tough all the way around.” “There would be strong market forces for “back room” abortions. Medical people or non-medical people would be selling illegal abortions.”
6. By forcing a parent-child conversation “around the kitchen table” the law is the quintessential “Big Government” legislation:
“Of all the legislation in the legislature, this is probably the most big government bill there is. It is not a criticism because of the intent, it is a marvelous intent, but we just can’t make teens tell their parents something they normally wouldn’t tell them by passing a bill.”
As is obvious, some of these arguments stray from the intent of the law and have at best limited merit. It is difficult to assume, for example, that illegal “back room” abortions would result from this legislation. A probable assumption, as voiced by Representative Baldonado, is that organizations such as Planned Parenthood would find ways of dealing with the issue, both confidentially and expediently.
Representative Baldonado, responding to Representative Maestas repeated assurances that the legislation was of good intent, asked that members of the committee consult on the issues they had raised. No response was given.
We ask for prayers for the unborn, the mothers of the unborn and especially, as this legislation attempted to address, the mothers of mothers who are teens.
Your in Christ,
Jose Vasquez
New Mexico Watchman
Does not Understanding raise her voice? At the highest point along the way, where the paths meet, she takes her stand; beside the gate leading into the city, at the entrance, she cries aloud: “To you, O people, I call out; I raise my voice to all mankind. You who are simple, gain prudence; you who are foolish, set your hearts on it. Proverbs 8: 1-5