Would mandatory parental notification laws regarding contraceptive prescriptions have a negative effect on teenage girls' health?
PRO (yes)
CON (no)
The ACLU wrote in a July 18, 2003 press release "Preventing Teenagers from Getting Contraceptives Unless They Tell a Parent Puts Teens at Risk":
"Studies show that preventing teens from getting contraceptives unless they tell a parent won’t stop teenagers from having sex. It will just drive them away from the services they need to protect themselves, leading to higher rates of unintended pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), including HIV...
Some people say that allowing teenagers to get contraceptives without first telling a parent encourages them to become sexually active.... But research about how teenagers behave flatly contradicts this theory....
Cutting off teenagers’ access to contraceptives... just drives them out of doctors’ offices. When teenagers don’t visit family planning providers, not only do they forego contraceptive services, they also miss or dangerously postpone screening and treatment for STDs, routine gynecological exams, and other vital health care services....
As Justice John Paul Stevens explained [in Carey v. Population Services International], to deny teenagers access to contraception in an effort to impress upon them the evils of underage sex is ... irrational...."
Diane Reddy, PhD, Associate Professor at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (UWM) wrote in an Aug. 13, 2002 press release "UWM Study: Parent notification Laws Would Curtail Teen Use of Sex-Related Health Services":
"'Parental notification laws would discourage girls who are already sexually active and responsible enough to try to prevent pregnancy from using the services of family planning clinics.... Not only would such laws increase the risk of teen pregnancies, but they would also discourage the teens from seeking screening and treatment for sexually transmitted diseases,' says Reddy. The end result is a likely increase in unplanned pregnancies, abortions, out-of-wedlock births and HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs)....
Although the [UWM] survey... involved prescription contraceptives, many of the surveyed teens also said they would stop or delay visits to healthcare clinics for other sexually-related tests or treatments.... The UWM study and other research indicate laws mandating parent-teen communication about sexual health issues won't work, says Reddy."
Carol Ford, MD, Associate Professor of Pediatrics and Internal Medicine, wrote in an Aug. 14, 2002 article "Limiting Confidentiality of Adolescent Health Services," published in the Journal of the American Medical Association:
"Prescription methods of contraception are associated with lower rates of pregnancy compared with nonprescription.... Support for confidential services is often perceived as precluding efforts to strengthen parent-teen communication, but that perception is erroneous. There is no reason that efforts to strengthen communication between adolescents and their parents cannot take place even though confidential health care is available to adolescents who need or want it....
The greatest risk is that adolescents who need health care will not receive it and will experience preventable negative outcomes, endangering their own health and often the public health as well. This outcome is not in the best interest of adolescents, their parents, or professionals dedicated to preserving the health and well-being of this age group."
Joseph Wheeler, President of the Pro-Life Victory Committee, wrote in his article ""Parent-Free Teen Contraception Pushed," published Jan. 21, 2005 in WorldNetDaily:
"All the information we have looked at points to an opposite effect. Since the policy of parental consent was instituted in our county there are no indications and no valid scientific claims that teen pregnancy and STDs have increased. Actually, our pregnancy rates have gone down consistent with national averages, which I would consider a success. So have the county's abortion rates. McHenry County citizens successfully prove the positive effect that parents are fully capable and are worthy of their authority to be parents and the societal harms proposed by contrary prognostications are erroneous in light of our evidence."
Leslee J. Unruh, President of the Abstinence Clearinghouse, was quoted in an article written by Sam Kastensmidt titled "AMA Calls for Parent-Free Teen Contraception," published Jan. 29, 2005 by The Center for Reclaiming America for Christians:
"... [T]he AMA’s suggestion [that lawmakers should lift all parental notification laws governing contraception for teens] would set a very dangerous precedent. From birth, parents are responsible for helping their children to grow, to learn, and to succeed. Why is it that as soon as children become teenagers, the ability of parents to help their children is suddenly not good enough.... The dangerous road contraception education groups would have us travel is one we cannot afford to take.... 'Our children deserve better. They deserve the help and direction parents can provide in making life-altering decisions as adolescents."
Concerned Women for America (CWA) wrote in a Jan. 19, 2005 press release, "CWA Says JAMA Study Is ‘Politicized Science'":
"Concerned Women for America (CWA) today discounted the newly released Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) study, which claims that parental notification for minors to receive prescription contraception will lead to more unplanned pregnancies and a rise in the rate of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs)....
'Policy-makers need to stop treating parents as a suspect-class, presumed not to have their own kids’ best interests at heart. Adolescents benefit when their parents are involved in their lives and policy-makers shouldn’t forbid their involvement in their daughters’ and sons’ most important decisions,' said [Wendy] Wright [CWA’s senior policy director]."
