As the debate rages on about the Constitutionality of parental notification laws for minors seeking an abortion, it is interesting to note that the chief weapon of the pro-abortion lobby ("the life of the mother") in arguing against such notification laws is pretty much a red herring argument to disguise the fact that they are trying to lobby for abortion on demand by any woman of childbearing age. And it is exactly that dishonesty, which pervades nearly all of their talking points, that should cause every moderate to question their true agenda and purpose.

You see, the laws in question require parental notification, not necessarily parental consent. Parental notification is absolutely essential for a parent who is held legally liable for the health and safety of a child. Parents can be, and have been, charged with neglect for failing to act when their child is having a high fever or other symptoms of illness; how much more would they be held liable for followup care if their daughter hemmorrhages after this surgical procedure? While I would argue for parental consent AND notification before an abortion is provided (unless otherwise enjoined by court order), it is telling that even parental notification. But I digress.

You see, all I have to do is apply the little bit of knowledge I am acquiring in my first responder classes to explain why this is a red herring. As a Basic Life Support provider, if I attend to an emergency situation that involves a minor, and cannot find the parents for consent, I am allowed to give emergency medical treatment to that child. While there are limits on what I can provide (as with EMTs, paramedics, and physicians) without parental consent, I can do what is necessary to stabilize the patient without parental consent, if no parent or guardian is present and if there is not a signed medical consent perform. In certain very rare instances, it may be necessary for some medical personnel further up the chain to use lifesaving measures that would endanger the fetus and lead to a spontaneous abortion.

Therefore, in the instances of "life of the mother", the right of a minor to an abortion absent parental notification is, in fact, already there. If the parent is present and refuses the procedure, they should be informed of the risks of refusing the procedure and sign paperwork to that effect. As much as a medical provider may wish to help, they should never be allowed to make the judgement to override a parent's decision.

While the pro abortion lobby is extremely adept at concocting "what if" scenarios to "sell" us closer and closer to the concept of taxpayer funded abortion on demand, the fact is, most of those are red herrings, and the answers are already available in our current legal system. This is one of those cases.