i'm discussing teen
pregnancy on a different forum, and a
thought crossed my mind:
if a minor gets pregnant and her parents
don't want to be stuck supporting her and
her baby, can the parents give their
daughter up for
adoption?
I haven't heard of a
case like this and I think it would be
quite difficult to do so. You have to be
doing something really wrong to lose
custody of your children to the state.
Many children out there could possibly
benefit from being away from their parents
but technically their parents aren't doing
anything to cause outward signs of abuse.
You have to really be putting your
children in danger of abuse or neglect to
lose them.
That's if you're reported though, I really
don't know the requirements, if any, for
parents who want to willingly give their
children away.
Good question. I'll have to study up a
bit more on the issue.
Quote:
I realize
pregnant teens can be emancipated, but
their parents are still responsible for
them until they hit
18.
the process of
emancipation is very, very
difficult and costly. I had a few
friends who went through it and had to
show that they could absolutely care for
themselves completely without assistance
before they were legally emancipated which
is difficult for teenagers to show. They
had to show residence (not just living
with some friend but actually paying rent
of some kind), transportation, and food
costs as well suckers that they had a job.
Quote:
is it not true
that kids can be put in foster care up to
age 17? Oh wouldn't that be a kick in
the a** if a girl got knocked up and
figured mommy and daddy would support her,
and they put her in the
system.
I would say that it
would be better for them to put her in the
system than just to kick her out (which
i've seen happen quite a few times).
Quote:
is there some
kind of law that prevents parents from
giving their pregnant daughters up for
adoption?
i wouldn't see why there
would be.
|
jenn_smithson
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 15 Nov 2004 Posts: 808 Location: Texas
Posted: 02-06-07 13:08pm
The above post was mine. I, too, don't
know why it posted as guest. Oh well.
Peace,
jenn
|
Meandering Away
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 06 Jul 2005 Posts: 535
Posted: 02-06-07 14:57pm
I have to say I wonder what sort of
reaction a pro lifer would get if they
came out and said that any child who has
an abortion should be kicked out of the
family home because of it.
This thread is just so wrong but no one is
complaining, whats the difference eh, oh
yeah I forgot the difference is a pro
choicer started this thread not a pro
lifer.
jenn
wrote:
cambion began this thread
discussing the foster care system of
.America and in .America, minors often
.D.O need parental consent to obtain an
abortion but do not require it to keep the
pregnancy or parent the resulting child.
In the context of the original discussion,
your comments: you wrote:
why should they need consent to have a
child when they don't need consent to have
an abortion, either you need parental
consent or you don't, you cannot pick and
choose.
Are the ones that are out of place. In
.America, you .D.O need consent to obtain
an abortion (if you're a minor) but you
don't need it to keep the pregnancy even
though the financial burden will fall to
someone other than the pregnant minor. If
you want to talk about picking and
choosing consent, then the place to start
.I.S. America because we arbitrarily set
standards that don't make any effing
sense.
please show me where america is mentioned
as you lot wish to be so pedantic about
it.
cambion
wrote:
if a minor gets pregnant and
her parents don't want to be stuck
supporting her and her baby, can the
parents give their daughter up for
adoption? I realize pregnant teens can be
emancipated, but their parents are still
responsible for them until they hit 18.
Is it not true that kids can be put in
foster care up to age 17? Oh wouldn't
that be a kick in the a** if a girl got
knocked up and figured mommy and daddy
would support her, and they put her in the
system. Is there some kind of law that
prevents parents from giving their
pregnant daughters up for adoption? Has
anyone ever put their adolescent in the
system (not anyone here, but just in
general - has anyone ever heard of such a
case)?
here you go basically saying any minor can
obtain an abortion without parental
consent.So much so it even states that the
law on sexual offences should not stop
them.So now tell me that "some minors need
parental consent to obtain an abortion,"
because you are wrong they do not.
birch
wrote:
uh, no, that was
you.
try reading the freaking link that was
above it before you make an fool of
yourself both of you.
cowboys
wrote:
quote:
so much so it even states that the law on
sexual offences should not stop them.So
now tell me that "some minors need
parental consent to obtain an abortion,"
because you are wrong they do
not.
birch
wrote:
a large number of minors,
.D.O, in fact, need parental consent to
obtain an abortion. In fact, the number
of second trimester abortions in my state
alone increased following the move to
parental consent because pregnant 17 year
olds who wanted an abortion but didn't
want to have to tell their parents simply
waited for their 18th birthday even though
it was even more unhealthy and dangerous
for them to do so. There are literally
millions of teenage girls in my state
alone and a large number of them will
become pregnant before they are 18. They
will all have to either obtain a judicial
bypass or obtain consent from their
parents. But, if these same teenagers
want to keep their pregnancies, they don't
have to tell anyone let alone get their
parent's permission even though their
parents could then be put in the position
to financially care for their child and
grandchild for extended periods of time.
once again you show that you failed to
read the link posted because it states
clearly that there is no age in the u.K
where a minor requires parental consent to
obtain an abortion.
birch
wrote:
you didn't even provide
links that would indicate where you were
until after you made a blanket statement
about consent, and after what you claim as
me assuming you were american!!! Dude!!!
I can do alot of things, but I am not
psychic.
what about your blanket statement, if you
did not assume I was american why put that
stupid wrong buzzer comment.
birch
wrote:
in some places of the world
you need parental
consent,
in some places you do not need consent so
how come yours is right and mine is
wrong.?
birch
wrote:
i never, ever said "any
minor can obtain an abortion without
parental consent"!!! Was it a late night
for you?
you seem to be assuming again, did I
mention you but had you read the link you
would see that the link stated that no minor needs
consent.
Is there a law that stops me throwing out
my daughter if she had an abortion.
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12984
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 02-06-07 15:19pm
anonymous
wrote:
eiri
wrote:
age was a factor because this specific
section is about parents giving up their
pregnant daughters to the system.
I say things within the frames of the
current debate, so remembering context
when I talk is
important...
yes, of course age is a factor. You
specifically mentioned 15 year olds...So I
was assuming you meant that consent for a
15 year old is different than consent for
a 17 year old, and I didn't see any
difference when I was reading about it
online. That's what I
meant.
no, I didn't mean that at all; and I feel
that if I had said "teen" I still would
have gotten the same limited response as
"15" of even "18".
|
Birch
Supporter
Joined: 07 Nov 2005 Posts: 4159 Location: Bliss,
Thanks: 159
Thanked:16
Posted: 02-06-07 17:10pm
cowboys
wrote:
i have to say I wonder what
sort of reaction a pro lifer would get if
they came out and said that any child who
has an abortion should be kicked out of
the family home because of it.
This thread is just so wrong but no one is
complaining, whats the difference eh, oh
yeah I forgot the difference is a pro
choicer started this thread not a pro
lifer.
jenn
wrote:
cambion began this thread
discussing the foster care system of
.America and in .America, minors often
.D.O need parental consent to obtain an
abortion but do not require it to keep the
pregnancy or parent the resulting child.
In the context of the original discussion,
your comments: you wrote:
why should they need consent to have a
child when they don't need consent to have
an abortion, either you need parental
consent or you don't, you cannot pick and
choose.
Are the ones that are out of place. In
.America, you .D.O need consent to obtain
an abortion (if you're a minor) but you
don't need it to keep the pregnancy even
though the financial burden will fall to
someone other than the pregnant minor.
If you want to talk about picking and
choosing consent, then the place to start
.I.S. America because we arbitrarily set
standards that don't make any effing
sense.
please show me where america is mentioned
as you lot wish to be so pedantic about
it.
cambion
wrote:
if a minor gets pregnant and
her parents don't want to be stuck
supporting her and her baby, can the
parents give their daughter up for
adoption? I realize pregnant teens can
be emancipated, but their parents are
still responsible for them until they hit
18. Is it not true that kids can be put
in foster care up to age 17? Oh wouldn't
that be a kick in the a** if a girl got
knocked up and figured mommy and daddy
would support her, and they put her in the
system. Is there some kind of law that
prevents parents from giving their
pregnant daughters up for adoption? Has
anyone ever put their adolescent in the
system (not anyone here, but just in
general - has anyone ever heard of such a
case)?
here you go basically saying any minor can
obtain an abortion without parental
consent.So much so it even states that the
law on sexual offences should not stop
them.So now tell me that "some minors need
parental consent to obtain an abortion,"
because you are wrong they do not.
birch
wrote:
uh, no, that was
you.
try reading the freaking link that was
above it before you make an fool of
yourself both of you.
cowboys
wrote:
quote:
so much so it even states that the law on
sexual offences should not stop them.So
now tell me that "some minors need
parental consent to obtain an abortion,"
because you are wrong they do
not.
birch
wrote:
a large number of minors,
.D.O, in fact, need parental consent to
obtain an abortion. In fact, the number
of second trimester abortions in my state
alone increased following the move to
parental consent because pregnant 17 year
olds who wanted an abortion but didn't
want to have to tell their parents simply
waited for their 18th birthday even though
it was even more unhealthy and dangerous
for them to do so. There are literally
millions of teenage girls in my state
alone and a large number of them will
become pregnant before they are 18. They
will all have to either obtain a judicial
bypass or obtain consent from their
parents. But, if these same teenagers
want to keep their pregnancies, they don't
have to tell anyone let alone get their
parent's permission even though their
parents could then be put in the position
to financially care for their child and
grandchild for extended periods of time.
once again you show that you failed to
read the link posted because it states
clearly that there is no age in the u.K
where a minor requires parental consent to
obtain an abortion.
birch
wrote:
you didn't even provide
links that would indicate where you were
until after you made a blanket statement
about consent, and after what you claim as
me assuming you were american!!! Dude!!!
I can do alot of things, but I am not
psychic.
what about your blanket statement, if you
did not assume I was american why put that
stupid wrong buzzer comment.
birch
wrote:
in some places of the world
you need parental
consent,
in some places you do not need consent so
how come yours is right and mine is
wrong.?
birch
wrote:
i never, ever said "any
minor can obtain an abortion without
parental consent"!!! Was it a late night
for you?
you seem to be assuming again, did I
mention you but had you read the link you
would see that the link stated that no minor needs
consent.
Is there a law that stops me throwing out
my daughter if she had an
abortion.
cowboys, you need to check out who you are
attributing quotes to. There's a few
screw ups here and that might be a big
part of the confusion.
When you say something like, "here you go
saying that any minor can..." i'm going to
assume you are talking to me. Just as
jenn did. If you had specified "look at
this link it says..." that's going to be
different.
Plus, this whole thread wasn't based on
kicking your daughter out if she had an
abortion, it was can you kick your daughter out if
she is pregnant and can the
grandparents put the baby into foster
care?. You brought up abortion
and consent. There's a big conceptual
difference there.
I highly doubt you're going to find a
prochoicer who would advocate the parents
kicking the daughter out, for any reason
whatsoever.
eiri
wrote:
no, I didn't mean that at
all; and I feel that if I had said "teen"
I still would have gotten the same limited
response as "15" of even "18".
sorry, eiri, I didn't understand what you
meant. I'm getting "consent" mixed up
with parents giving up their pregnant
daughters now!
|
lil_blaze2004
Supporter
Joined: 29 Oct 2004 Posts: 6492 Location: ,
Thanks: 1
Thanked:0
Posted: 02-06-07 17:28pm
I know here in montreal there are places
for teen mother's to live. Yes your
parents can place you inthe system if you
get pregnant but they will put you ina
regular group home up untill the girl is
closer to her due date, unless a room
opens up earlier.
Also if the girl is already in the system,
they will keep her there untill a bed
opens up in the place.
I grew up in the system-from the age of 12
so i've seen a lot of these cases.
i have to say I wonder what
sort of reaction a pro lifer would get if
they came out and said that any child who
has an abortion should be kicked out of
the family home because of
it.
they are entitled to
their opinion just as we are to ours. We
have not been advocating that pregnant
daughters be kicked out of the house,
merely speculating on what the legal
issues would be if one wished to do so.
Also, having a daughter who keeps a
pregnancy as opposed to one who chooses an
abortion are two different situations. A
daughter who keeps a pregnancy as a
teenager is very likely to be dependent
upon you for a long period of time. Both
of my sisters were dependent upon my
parents until well into their 30s, in
fact, one of them still lives in a house
my parents own and underpays rent for that
area just to be able to provide a stable
life for her kids. This is an economic
burden and hardship for my parents who
feel obligated to do this or else see
their grandchildren suffer or, worse,
starve. Friends of my parents, we can
call them the bakers, also had a young
daughter keep their pregnancy and has
since caused them to spend about half of
their retirement savings on medical and
food bills (the premature infant had
extensive medical problems and their
health insurance threatened to drop them).
So, let's assume just for fun that my
parents had not been well enough off to
provide a home for my sister when she
became pregnant as a teenager. Their
options would have been to a) kick her out
of the house b) put her into the system
or c) incur massive debt attempting to
provide for themselves, the children they
already had at home, .A.N.D
provide for my pregnant sister and
eventually her child(ren). The smartest
and safest option among those for an
impoverished family would be to place the
daughter in the system.
I don't see how it is appropriate to expect
or require a young woman's
parents to incur the costs of .H.E.R
pregnancy, especially when they are unable
to do so. They did not choose to become
grandparents let alone choose to foot the
enormous cost that a pregnancy and
childbirth carries. If the young woman
chooses to keep her pregnancy, then she
should realize that she is expected to
assume the costs of the pregnancy - not
her parents. Further, she should realize
that if she cannot afford the pregnancy,
child birth, or raising the resulting
child, then she should seriously consider abortion
or adoption.
My brother got into a little trouble when
he was still a minor and it resulted in
quite an expensive legal fine and
community service hours. The judge told
him, point blank, that our parents were
.N.O.T responsible for paying the fine,
that they could choose to leave him in
juvenile detention if they could not or
did not want to pay the fine on his
behalf. There he could slowly work off
his debt. I don't see why this situation
should be any different. Someone has to
assume the costs of the pregnancy and it
should be the pregnant person and her
partner. If they are unable to pay it,
then their relatives should not be forced
to do so simply because they are related
to her.
Quote:
this thread is
just so wrong but no one is complaining,
whats the difference eh, oh yeah I forgot
the difference is a pro choicer started
this thread not a pro
lifer.
the difference is
actually that we don't all have our heads
so far up our asses that we can't see how
this would be a viable alternative to
bankruptcy or debt for an impoverished
family.
Quote:
is there a law
that stops me throwing out my daughter if
she had an
abortion.
no, just as there is no
law stopping anyone from throwing a
pregnant daughter out on the street
either. And, just for the record, i've
seen the latter actually happen far more
than i've seen the former.
|
jenn_smithson
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 15 Nov 2004 Posts: 808 Location: Texas
Posted: 02-06-07 22:21pm
birch
wrote:
can the grandparents put the baby
into foster care?.
I completely forgot to
answer this one.
Technically, the answer would be yes, for
my area depending on certain
circumstances.
If the girl is under 17 in this state and
becomes pregnant, she is not automatically
emancipated as she would be if she lived
in other states. This means that she is
still considered a ward of her parents and
that she is not able to make important
medical and personal decisions without
their permission. So, let's say that a
15/16 year old becomes pregnant, chooses
to keep the pregnancy, and then gives
birth while she is still a minor and still
living in their home. Her parents could
give her child away without her consent in
this state because she doesn't yet have
the legal ability to give her consent
without theirs at that age and her consent
would not carry much weight in that
situation.
I have seen this happen where a young
woman was sent to a "maternity home" for
pregnant teenagers and her parents and the
people at the home basically neglected to
tell her that her own parents had already
signed the adoption papers on her behalf.
It caused a big scene and scandal when
she gave birth and they wouldn't let her
touch or see her own child because the
child had technically already been given
away to someone else.
Further, if a young woman is pregnant and
already in foster care, she gets no
parenting choice in the matter what so
ever unless she leaves the system before
she gives birth. A young woman in foster
care will literally have her child ripped
from her and given to someone else because
she will not satisfy the requirements to
keep her child (namely her own place,
source of income, and ability to provide
for herself and the child).
|
Cambion
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 08 Nov 2005 Posts: 747
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 02-07-07 10:40am
Hmm, my post didn't seem to get posted.
Anyway, thanks for the information, jenn.
I realize you stated that your information
is based on laws where you live, but still
is interesting to know. And no, I don't
necessarily advocate the two subjects I
brought up - I was genuinely curious about
both (in case anyone here has begun to
assume I want all pregnant teens put in
the system).
