Attn Michigan Frens: Read this notice twice…..your 11 yr old has to give YOU permission.
Then go thank an uninformed voter who thought prop 3 was only about abortion rights.
(media.greatawakening.win)
🚔 Crime & Democrats 💸
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (37)
sorted by:
It's no coincidence that they are laying a foundation for children to consent.
It cannot hold under established law. Children under 18 cannot enter into contracts without parental consent. SCOTUS will overturn this, or prove they are compromised and it is time for Americans to stand up together.
Washington state also has similar laws in place where I worked as a nurse for an 11-17yr old inpatient mental health facility. Parents can be cut completely out of the loop on their children's mental health care - but most are told about medications their kids are put on after their kid signs consent forms and ready to discharge home with new prescriptions (child abuse argument if parents don't fill them). As for the content of their therapy itself, I don't think that's gone over much with parents, if ever. There's nothing parents could do to fight it because it could be used as fuel to the fire of why their kid needs to stay longer away from their "controlling" parent(s). Meanwhile, kids learn new methods to manipulate their parents and the system to get what they think they want. It's absolutely atrocious.
Calif already had these same types of laws in place.
It sure is great to be required to pay for health coverage that you have zero access to information involving your minor child.
As far as I know, the Calif law had never been challenged in court.
California has been running these insane laws for at least a decade. It’s really difficult to challenge them. Much easier to just sign consent on behalf of your child—since they cannot legally sign contracts and such.
Yupp, ushered in by abortion and to "protect a girl/woman's ""right"" to it. Our pediatrician implemented this awhile ago and we went somewhere else, but was implemented to protect abortion "rights" from their parents.
It's a way to cut the parents out and eventually children consent.
But that's not what people thought they were voting for, I'm reasonably sure.
When I was in school, a girl in my class was pregnant. Rumor had it that it was her father.
She was 13. It was a HUGE scandal.
I can imagine people would be trying to protect a girl like this, who could not go to her parents for help when her parents caused the problem in the first place.
They might not have grasped the situation was much, much bigger -- a way for the government to manipulate, torture, brainwash your child and deny you any recourse.
thing is people see them heading straight toward medical decisions and don't see the flank of consenting to sex.