[Newspoetry] parental notification and its consequences

[DL Emerick]

Should parents of girls
younger than 18 be notified
before their child 
can have an abortion?
Nov 29, 2005
Yes      81.7% (138)
No       13.0%   (22)
Not sure  5.3% (9)
Total Votes:   169

in Rapid City Journal

*********************
If parents want to be notified,
the law should say something more,
something about parental duties.

If parents want to block an abortion,
then law should conclusively presume
that the parent's choose to support
any such child subsequently born,
as if it had been born to them,
and not to their daughter,
for their daughter becomes
only a surrogate for the parents,
who could have chosen abortion,
if it had been the wife-mother,
without any veto of the father.

Or, if notice is needed,
it must have escape clauses,
because many parents are cruel,
vindictive, streaked with evil,
of the worst forms of morality,
the kind that authorizes pain
as a substitute for care.

The pregnancy might have come
about by way of some incest,
or other kinds of parent abuse,
the kinds that drive them away,
trying to find comfort in sex.

The pregnancy might threaten
the life of the daughter,
spirtually, or physically.

For, any pregnancy is highly risky,
problematic from the moment it begins,
and its effects last a life time,
at least, maybe more, on other lives.

In short, the duty of a parent
toward a child is unrecognized,
the duty to be loving and caring,
self-sacrificing, child-promoting.

Let there be no contribution rule,
not from the implicated boy (man),
because girl's parents have chosen
to block the abortion, themselves,
and assumed all costs, themselves.

But, you see, the newspaper poll
did not care to notify the parents
of their possible responsibilities,
of their duties, to tell the truth,
that ignorant morality isn't free
to live in its prejudiced ways;
it comes with a high price tag.