Colo. Gov't Teenage Uterine Control Success Touted

Sexual revolutionaries across America are marveling at, what would seem to be obvious:  When teenage girls are subjected, without parental notification, to government-injected devices into their uterus that prevent implantation of fertilized human eggs, the rate of teenage pregnancy will drop.  However, what naïve liberals overlook (or simply don't care about) is the resulting natural increase in the rate of teen sexual promiscuity that then leads to fewer stable families in the future, and thus the ultimate collapse of society.

"Teens are complicated:  They're forgetful, nervous, anxious, awkward, transitioning. Give them the option of an IUD or contraceptive implant and now their worries and quirks around sex and preventing pregnancy are taken care of in one setting for the next five to 10 years."
-- Dr. Jennifer Francis, Columbia University Medical Center (New York City)

For background, click headlines below to read previous articles:

Pre-teen Secret Gov't Uterus Tampering in Seattle Schools

President Obama's CDC Wants More Worry-free Sex for Teen Girls

Pediatricians Push IUDs & Implants on Teen Girls

U.S. Teenage Birth Rate Lowest on Record

Also read how public schools across America provide sex training for children.

In addition, read how Planned Parenthood teams up with schools by providing "kinky sex trainers" for kids across America.

-- From "How Colorado lowered teen pregnancy rate by 40%" by Ashley Welch, CBS News 7/7/15

From 2009 to 2015, the Colorado Family Planning Initiative provided women around the state with intrauterine devices (IUDs) or implants, types of long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) at little or no cost. During that period, teen births dropped 40 percent and abortions fell 35 percent, according to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment.

The use of LARC methods has increased nearly five-fold over the last decade, according to a 2015 report from the CDC. And just last year, the American Academy of Pediatrics updated its recommendations, suggesting IUDs and implants should be the "first line" of contraceptives in preventing teen pregnancy.

While LARC methods are covered under the [ObamaCare] Affordable Care Act, several loopholes exist and some insurers may not cover the full cost of the device and its insertion. Experts say confidentiality is also a problem, as teens are less likely to get IUDs when their parents' insurance companies send a letter home explaining the procedure.

[Dr.] Francis hopes the success seen in Colorado will influence broader policies ensuring access to LARC methods for women across the country.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Colorado’s push against teen pregnancies proves huge success" by Sabrina Tavernise, The New York Times 7/5/15

Teenage births have been declining nationally, but experts say the timing and magnitude of the reductions in Colorado are a strong indication the state’s program was a major driver.

About one-fifth of women ages 18 to 44 in Colorado now use a long-acting method, a substantial increase driven largely by teenagers and poor women.

Women’s health advocates contend that long-acting birth control is giving American women more say over when — and with whom — they have children.

Proponents say the [Colorado] program is working. The state health department estimated that every dollar spent on the long-acting birth-control initiative saved $5.85 for the state’s Medicaid program, which covers more than three-quarters of teenage pregnancies and births. Enrollment in the federal nutrition program for women with young children declined nearly a quarter between 2010 and 2013.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Colorado's Teen Birth Rate Fell 40 Percent Thanks To A Free Contraception Program" by Anna Almendrala, The Huffington Post 7/6/15

"The findings from the Colorado study are exciting, and highlight the importance of removing barriers to LARC use for all women, but in particular those at high risk of unintended pregnancy, such as adolescents and poor women,” said Dr. Maria Rodriguez, an assistant professor of obstetrics and gynecology who specializes in family planning at Oregon Health & Science University, but was not involved in the Colorado LARC experiment.

In addition to being free, the program’s stunning success can be partly attributed to LARCs’ superior effectiveness rate. Short of permanent sterilization, IUDs and hormonal implants are the most fool-proof way to protect against pregnancy, with failure rates of less than one percent. Condoms, on the other hand, have failure rates of 18 to 21 percent with average use, while the pill, the patch and the ring have failure rates of nine percent.

Unfortunately, teens aren’t using LARCs at the same rates as older women, most likely because of the high upfront cost associated with the devices and unfounded fear and misunderstanding of LARCs, according to a recent CDC report.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Colo. won't fund birth-control initiative despite success" by Mary Bowerman and Trevor Hughes, USA TODAY 7/7/15

A much-heralded Colorado effort credited with significantly reducing teen pregnancy and abortion rates is searching for new funding after GOP lawmakers declined to provide taxpayer dollars to keep it going.

Started in 2009 with an anonymous private grant, the state-run Colorado Family Planning Initiative gave free or reduced-price IUDs or implantable birth control to more than 30,000 women.

Colorado Family Action, which opposed state funding for the program, said using taxpayer dollars would have inappropriately inserted the government between children and their parents.

"We believe that offering contraceptives to teens, especially long-acting reversible contraceptives, while it may prevent pregnancy, does not help them understand the risks that come with sexual activities," CFA said in a statement. "We should not remove parents from the equation — equipping teens for safe sex without their parent's involvement bypasses this critical parental right and responsibility. Parents need to be the primary educator when it comes to sexual education and the primary decision about healthcare choices for their children. Lastly, Colorado taxpayers should not be paying for the 'Cadillac' of birth control for minor children."

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read Abstinence Education Effective, Federal Study Shows and another study shows Abstinent Teens the Norm, Moral Sex-Ed Works, but nonetheless, President Obama Wants an End to Abstinence Education, Favoring Anal Sex, and now a judge has ruled that Abstinence Education is Illegal in California.

Abortion Study: Teens Want Parents' Help to Decide

A new study by the University of Chicago shows that the majority of teenage girls want to consult with parents who are involved in their lives when making decisions about having an abortion.  The minority of teens who hid an abortion from their parents did so assuming the parents would discourage the abortion.

"There's a commonly accepted idea that teens will try to hide their pregnancy or abortion decision. However, pregnant young women actually do turn to parents in the majority of cases."
-- Lee Hasselbacher, Researcher, University of Chicago, Section of Family Planning and Contraceptive Research

For background, read how it took over a decade for the Illinois parental notification law to go into effect.

-- From "Study finds young women involve parent in abortion when anticipating support" posted at MedicalXpress 9/15/14

The study, published online ahead of print in the American Journal of Public Health, explored the factors young women under age 18 consider when deciding to involve a parent. Researchers conducted interviews with 30 minors seeking abortion in Illinois, prior to implementation of the 2013 parental notification law. Currently, there are 38 states with laws requiring a parent to provide consent or receive notification before a minor can access abortion services.

While each young woman's family circumstance was different, there were several common motivations for involving a parent. Factors favoring telling included close and supportive relationships, need for help with logistics like travel or payment, or experiences that made discovery of the pregnancy seem inevitable.

Minors expressed a range of motivations for not telling a parent about their abortion. Some teens worried that if their parent learned of their decision, it would dramatically change their relationship or feared it would even lead to anger or harm. Young women also discussed the lack of a relationship or presence as a reason they did not want to involve a parent.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Minors' Abortion Approval: Penn. Supreme Court

In a 6-1 ruling, the Pennsylvania high court overruled a county judge's decision on "judicial bypass" of parental notification for an abortion of a 17-year-old girl, thus clarifying what it takes for a minor to have an abortion without the parents' knowledge.

-- From "Abortion opponents heartened by Pennsylvania high court ruling" by Bobby Kerlik, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review 12/24/11

Abortion opponents are hoping a state Supreme Court decision clarifying how minors can get judicial approval for abortions will encourage county judges to scrutinize such requests.

The court ruled on Thursday that a 17-year-old's decision not to ask her mother's permission for an abortion was not a valid reason for Allegheny County Common Pleas Judge Philip Ignelzi to deny her the procedure in March 2010.

Although the court ruled that Ignelzi improperly denied the girl's request, in part, because there was no parental notification, the justices said county judges' decisions should be given deference. Statistics on how often judges grant abortions are not available because the cases typically are sealed.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Pa. court: Not telling parents isn't basis for judges to deny permission for girls' abortions" Mark Scolforo, Associated Press 12/22/11

The 1982 state law states that if a pregnant girl under 18 cannot get her parents' consent, or if she does not want to seek it, a judge can authorize an abortion after determining she is "mature and capable of giving informed consent."

[The pregnant minor] applied for the judicial bypass in March 2010, saying she was three months shy of turning 18, 10 weeks pregnant, and a high school senior with average grades who planned to go to college and hoped to become a lawyer.

She told the county judge she was concerned her mother would throw her out if she learned of the pregnancy, and that she had no relationship with her father.

The high court decision also ruled that appeals courts, when reviewing county court decisions on judicial bypass requests, should determine whether a judge abused his or her discretion.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Pennsylvania Court Rules on Rubber Stamp Teen Abortions" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com 12/26/11

Pro-life advocates have been concerned that the U.S. Supreme Court-mandated bypass provision has become a rubber stamp process by which courts allow virtually any teenager seeking to not inform their parents to get an abortion without them knowing — as opposed to the law’s intent, which is to allow that bypass only in cases when teenagers are genuinely concerned about physical abuse if their parents find out about the pregnancy.

Although the court ruled the judge did not properly deny the girl’s request for an abortion in the specific case, Randall Wenger, an attorney who represented pro-life groups Pennsylvania Family Institute and Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation, told the Pittsburgh newspaper he thinks the ruling is still helpful.

This is the first-ever review of the pro-life law by the state’s highest court and it received legal support from pro-life groups and state legislators who support the law protecting a parent’s right to be involved in their child’s decision regarding abortion.

The Pennsylvania law and others like it have already been upheld at the U.S. Supreme Court and pro-life groups argue that a Pennsylvania trial court judge applied the correct legal standard and legitimately exercised his legal authority under the statute when he rejected a minor girl’s request for a secret abortion, stating that she needed consent from at least one of her parents.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

NH Gov. Vetoes Abortion Parental Notification

The New Hampshire Catholic bishop is appealing to the state legislature to override Gov. John Lynch's veto of a bill requiring abortionists to inform parents, or a judge (48 hours in advance), of the intention of any girl under age 18 to kill her unborn child.

UPDATE 6/23/11: Notification becomes law as House overrides veto by 266-102, Senate overrides by 17-7

-- From "NH gov vetoes bill requiring parental notification" by Norma Love, Associated Press 6/15/11

Exceptions existed if a doctor determined the female's life was at risk or if a delay would create "serious risk of substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily organ."

The Democratic governor said he was prepared to sign a parental notification bill if it contained commonsense changes. He said a young woman should not be forced to involve the person who abused her in the decision.

He also noted that if doctors performed abortions and it was later determined to be the wrong decision, they would have faced criminal liability.

Four years ago, Lynch made New Hampshire the first state to repeal a law requiring parental notification for minors to get abortions. He said the unenforced law was unconstitutional because it failed to protect the safety of young women.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Bishop urges Legislature to overturn abortion notification veto" by Dan Tuohy, New Hampshire Union Leader 6/21/11

Bishop John B. McCormack . . . head of the Roman Catholic Church in the state, said the bill recognizes the importance of the constitutionally protected role that parents have in caring for their children.

“It would be a grave mistake to divest parents of meaningful input into the health care of their minor children,” he said in statement. “It is significant that in every other context of an adolescent’s life, the law assumes that parents are the natural guardians of their child’s health and best interests. Indeed, New Hampshire requires parental consent — not just parental notification — with respect to a long list of health care and non-health care matters, including tanning, body piercing, employment, and the possession and use of an asthma inhaler and epinephrine auto injectors.”

In what way does it make sense that a child cannot be given an aspirin by a school nurse without the consent of the parent,” McCormack said, “but that same child can have an abortion, serious surgery with life-changing consequences, without the parent even knowing that it has happened?”

The Republican-dominated Legislature appears to have strength to muster an override. The House passed the bill 256 to 102 and the Senate passed it 17 to 7.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Parental Notification Veto Not Likely The Last Word" by Josh Rogers, New Hampshire Public Radio 6/16/11

Parental notification has been a hot-button issue for as long as John Lynch has been Governor, and throughout Lynch’s almost 7 years in office his stance has been pretty consistent: He didn’t think a notice law was needed but did think that parents would ideally be involved in a minor's decision to have an abortion. Lynch’s veto message, though, says something a little different.

“I support parental notification. I think parents should be involved in decision of this significance, but I also recognize that are situation where parents can’t be involved, particularly where there are minors who are victims of rape and incest.”

Parental notification bills have historically had a hard time in Concord. The one passed in 2003 and later repealed after a legal battle that stretched all the way to the US Supreme Court cleared the state senate by just a single vote. But republican leaders made this bill a top priority, and it cleared both chambers more than 2 to 1 margins.

. . . 2/3rd votes in both chambers are required for an override. But neither the governor, nor lawmakers may have the final word. Diana Kasdan of an ACLU lawyer who monitors abortion issues nationwide. She says a court challenge would examine more than case law and statutory construction.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Six Abortion Bills Pass Florida House

Amid passionate debate, some Florida Democrats supported Republicans as bills passed ranging from parental notification for abortion, to mothers viewing their child by ultrasound, and late-term abortion bans.

For background, read Tea Party Christians Dominate Florida, Target Abortion and also read Pro-life Legislation Floods America

UPDATE 8/1/11: Scott ceremonially signs four anti-abortion bills at governor’s mansion

UPDATE 6/24/11: Governor continues signing more bills

UPDATE 6/3/11: Gov. Rick Scott begins signing bills

-- From "House passes six abortion bills" by Dara Kam, Palm Beach Post 4/27/11

The chamber spent nearly five hours debating the measures that will require women to have an ultrasound before getting an abortion, make it more difficult for minor girls to get a judicial bypass for the procedure without parents’ consent, impose strict regulations on abortion clinics and ban some private insurers from providing abortion coverage.

“For many people this is a moral issue, this is a life and death issue,” said Rep. Dennis Baxley, R-Ocala, former executive director of the Florida Christian Coalition.

Republicans admitted the bills are aimed at reducing the number of abortions in Florida.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Abortion limits stir conflict among Democrats" by Janet Zink, Miami Herald/Times Tallahassee Bureau 4/27/11

. . . an argument between two Democrats created the most drama, with papers flying and a pen angrily tossed into a waste basket. The fireworks broke out when Rep. Daphne Campbell, D-Miami, quoted the Bible and said she planned to break ranks.

“Thou shall not kill,” Campbell told her colleagues before a vote on HB 1247, the parental notification bill. It passed 82-35.

“This is not a bill for Republicans or Democrats because it’s a Republican bill,” Campbell said during discussion of HJR 1179, which proposes a constitutional amendment to prohibit public funding of abortions. “This is Bible principles.”

Rep. Scott Randolph, a Democrat from Orlando who has been one of the most vocal opponents of the GOP abortion bills, was so upset with Campbell for siding with Republicans that he told her he’d get an opponent to unseat her in two years.

Campbell’s retort: “You have no right. God put me here.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Florida House Passes Mandatory Ultrasound, Other Pro-Life Bills" by Kevin Derby, Sunshine State News 4/28/11

The ultrasound measure, similar to the one that passed the Legislature last year but was vetoed by then-Gov. Charlie Crist, passed 81-37.

Legislators debated the measure, which was introduced by Rep. Elizabeth Porter, R-Lake City, for more than an hour and a half, clashing on medicine, the necessity of the legislation and over who would pay for the ultrasound.

“This is the only opportunity for the child to provide input,” insisted Rep. Mike Weinstein, R-Jacksonville, who pointed to the importance of ultrasounds in making mothers feel connected to their unborn children.

Democrats fired back, questioning the need for the bill when the economy continued to struggle and the budget remained incomplete.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Secret Abortions Continue in Illinois

The Illinois Supreme Court refused to intervene concerning the state parental notice law that has been unenforced since its passage in 1995.

UPDATE 9/15/14: Study finds Illinois girls want parental involvement in abortion decision

UPDATE 6/17/11 Delayed Again: Illinois Appellate Court sends case back to trial court without decision

-- From "Illinois high court won't hear abortion case" by The Associated Press 8/31/10

A motion filed by the anti-abortion Thomas More Society and others asked that the legal case pending against the Parental Notice of Abortion Act [of 1995] be transferred from the appellate court to the high court.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday denied the request.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Motion Filed Demanding Illinois Supreme Court Rule on Parental Notice Law" by Peter J. Smith, LifeSiteNews.com 8/20/10

Exasperated with Illinois' parental notice law going unenforced for 15 years since its initial passage, pro-life attorneys are demanding the state Supreme Court intervene once and for all, so that the law can go into effect.

“More than fifteen years ago, with overwhelming bipartisan support, parental notice was supposedly made the law in Illinois, but as we sit here today, secret abortions on pregnant minors continue unabated,” said Peter Breen, Thomas More Society executive director and legal counsel.

Judge Daniel Riley of the Cook County Circuit Court dismissed the lawsuit brought against the Act by the American Civil Liberties Union this past March, ruling the Act constitutionally valid. While he viewed the 1970 Illinois State Constitution as including a right to abortion, he said the Act should stand since the Illinois right to abortion is not broader than the federal right, thereby allowing for certain restrictions.

However, Riley issued an indefinite stay on his order for the duration of the ACLU's legal appeal.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Illinois AG Ignores Requests to Enforce Parental Notification" by Illinois Family Institute, 8/28/10

. . . despite receiving thousands of phone calls, faxes and emails, [Illinois] Attorney General Lisa Madigan joined the ACLU in opposing the motion to transfer the case to the Supreme Court.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Washington School Arranges Secret Abortion

A Seattle mother is furious after learning that her 15-year-old daughter was sent by her school's health center for a secret abortion, reports ABC-affiliate KOMO.


UPDATE 3/28/10: Seattle Times editorial says "School did nothing wrong when they helped a pregnant student seeking an abortion"

UPDATE 3/25/10: Officials admit 'secret abortions' permitted by law; parents fooled by school 'fine print'

-- From "Mother furious after in-school clinic sets up daughter's abortion" by KOMO-TV staff posted at Seattle Post-Intelligencer 3/23/10

The mother of a Ballard High School student is fuming after the health center on campus helped facilitate her daughter's abortion during school hours.

The mother, whom KOMO News has chosen to identify only as "Jill," says the [Planned Parenthood] clinic kept the information "confidential."

When she signed a consent form, Jill figured it meant her 15-year-old could go to the Ballard Teen Health Center located inside the high school for an earache, a sports physical, even birth control, but not for help terminating a pregnancy.

Jill says her daughter, a pro-life advocate, was given a pass, put in a taxi and sent off to have an abortion during school hours, all without her family knowing.

The Seattle School District says it doesn't run the health clinics at high schools. Swedish Medical Center runs the clinic at Ballard High and protects the students' privacy.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Seattle Mom: School Sent My Daughter for Secret Abortion without Telling Me" by Patrick B. Craine, LifeSiteNews.com 3/24/10

"They just told her that if she concealed it from her family, that it would be free of charge and no financial responsibility," Jill said.

T.J. Cosgrove of the King County Health Department, which oversees the center, explained that Washington state does not recognize parents' opinions on such issues. "At any age in the state of Washington, an individual can consent to a termination of pregnancy," he said.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Judge Halts Abortion Parental Notification in Illinois, Again

[Cook County Circuit Court] Judge Daniel Riley granted a temporary restraining order sought by the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois in the late afternoon, hours after Illinois' medical disciplinary board decided the state could begin enforcing the law.

-- From "Abortion law: Court blocks Illinois' parental notification law" by Sara Olkon, Chicago Tribune reporter 11/5/09

The restraining order was based on an October lawsuit filed by a Chicago physician and a Granite City women's medical clinic who believe the 1995 law is unconstitutional and would harm minors by preventing them from obtaining safe abortions or force them to carry their pregnancies to term.

During the hourlong court hearing Wednesday, Assistant Attorney General Thomas Ioppolo argued that the state was well within its right to enforce notification.

Debate has shadowed the notification law for more than 30 years. In July, a federal appeals court in Chicago lifted an injunction on a 1995 version of the law, clearing it for enforcement. In August, the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation gave doctors a 90-day grace period before enforcement would begin Tuesday.

Critics of the delay say teens from neighboring states with stricter rules drive to Illinois to avoid talking to their parents about a pregnancy. Iowa requires notification, and with some exceptions, doctors performing abortions in Indiana, Michigan, Missouri and Wisconsin must have parental consent before doing the procedure.

To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.

New IL Parental Notification for Abortion Harmful to Minors: Liberal Media

After years of abortionists' and other liberals' court battles against this new law, abortion clinics must now notify a parent or guardian for girls 17 and younger; critics claim minors will now seek back-alley abortions.

-- From "Illinois parental notification law goes into effect Tuesday" by Sara Olkon, Chicago Tribune reporter 11/2/09

The state parental notification law, scheduled to take effect Tuesday, has been subject to legal challenges and revisions for more than 30 years. In July, a federal appeals court in Chicago lifted a federal injunction on a 1995 version of the law, clearing it for enforcement. In August, the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation granted doctors a 90-day grace period before the law would go into effect.

In Illinois, a parent or guardian does not have to give consent for the procedure, but they would need to be notified that a teenager is planning to have an abortion. The laws often are stricter outside of the state.

With some exceptions, doctors performing abortions in Indiana, Michigan, Missouri and Wisconsin must have parental consent before going ahead with the procedure. Iowa requires notification only.

Critics of the notification law believe it's unconstitutional and that it will harm minors by preventing them from obtaining safe abortions or forcing them to carry their pregnancies to term. [Studies prove otherwise.] Most teenagers already involve their parents in the decision, abortion rights advocates say. Those who don't, they argue, have good reason.

No notice is required in a medical emergency or if the girl declares in writing that she is a victim of sexual abuse. And a provision in the law allows girls to bypass parental notification by going before a judge, who would then have 48 hours to rule on the petition.

The Illinois civil rights group has been training lawyers and advocates on how to shepherd girls through the court procedure. The group also created a Facebook profile and a Web page, ilbypasscoordinationproject.org, to provide information.

To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.

Study: Parental Involvement Reduces Teen Abortion

There’s solid evidence that well-designed laws can protect mothers and their unborn children.

-- From "A Parental-Involvement Opportunity" by Michael J. New, University of Alabama, posted at National Review Online 9/16/08

[Parental-involvement] laws enjoy broad support and unlike other laws limiting abortion, they can be easily justified as a parental-rights issue. Furthermore, my recent study for the Family Research Council provides evidence that well designed parental-involvement laws have been surprisingly effective at reducing abortion rates among minors.

Indeed, there are a number of academic and policy studies which demonstrate the effectiveness of pro-life parental-involvement laws. Four studies in peer-reviewed academic journals use time-series, cross-sectional data to simultaneously analyze all the enacted pro-life parental-involvement laws over an extended period of time. These studies find that these pieces of legislation reduce the in-state minor abortion rate by anywhere from 13 to 19 percent. Case studies of parental-involvement laws that have been enacted in Massachusetts, Indiana, Missouri, and Minnesota arrive at similar conclusions about the effects of parental-involvement laws.

However, the best case study of a pro-life parental-involvement law appeared in The New England Journal of Medicine in 2006. This study analyzed the Texas parental-notification law that took effect in 2000. The authors found that the law resulted in statistically significant declines in the abortion rate in Texas among 15-year-olds, 16-year-olds, and 17-year-olds. Now the authors did find some evidence that some 17-year-olds were able to circumvent the law by waiting until their 18th birthday to have an abortion. However, they found little evidence that Texas minors were circumventing the law by obtaining abortions in neighboring states.

To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.

Illinois Judge Blocks Parental-Notification Law

Potentially lifesaving law again denied by activist judge

From "Illinois Judge Blocks Parental Notification Law" from CitizenLink, posted 3/5/08

An activist judge in Illinois has ruled that teens can continue to get an abortion without telling their parents. Illinois is one of 35 states with parental-notification laws, but the 1984 law has never been enforced.

Joe Scheidler, national director of the Pro-Life Action League, called the inaction an injustice.

“We’re talking here about parents knowing that their minor daughter is having dangerous surgery — sometimes lethal surgery," he said. "And the courts believe that the parents shouldn’t even know about it.”

Sandy Rios, president of the Culture Campaign, said the Parental Notice of Abortion Act is crucial because Illinois is a magnet for women seeking an abortion.

“We have all of these young girls coming from our border states to get abortions because they don’t have to have any parental notification," she said. "There’s just no law, no regulation. And those of us in Illinois are ashamed of that situation.

“The law is very clear. We had a law that was passed by the state Legislature years ago. And we can’t get it enacted because of the judicial activism. It is a disgrace.”

So Illinois parents have the right to inspect their daughter's school curriculum but not to inspect a choice that terminates a life with consequences for a lifetime? "It's a disgrace" is right.