[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 94 (Wednesday, July 15, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Page S8263]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        CHILD CUSTODY PROTECTION

 Mr. ABRAHAM. Mr. President, I rise to bring to my colleagues' 
attention an opinion piece from the New York Times by Bruce A. Lucero. 
Mr. Lucero until recently owned and operated the ``New Woman, All Women 
Health Care'' abortion clinic and remains, in his words, ``staunchly 
pro-choice.'' He also supports my Child Custody Protection Act, S. 
1645, currently being marked-up in the Judiciary Committee. This 
article shows, I believe, that even strong pro-choice advocates have 
good reason to join with those of us who are pro-life in supporting 
parental involvement in their daughters' decision whether or not to 
have an abortion.
  In his article, Mr. President, Mr. Lucero points out that the Child 
Custody Protection Act is important for the health of teen-age girls 
across America. By making it illegal for anyone to take a minor across 
state lines for an abortion without first meeting the home state's 
parental notification requirements, this Act sees to it that parents 
are involved in their daughter's critical medical decision of whether 
to have an abortion. Where teen-agers cannot consult their parents, for 
example because of abuse, a judge may waive the parental notification 
requirement. But as Mr. Lucero points out, parents almost always are 
the best source of emotional support and financial assistance for girls 
facing unplanned pregnancies. In addition, teen-age girls who avoid 
consulting their parents too often end up having later term, more 
dangerous procedures and avoiding necessary follow-up care. These 
factors combine to increase medical risks significantly for teen-age 
girls who undergo secret abortions.
  Mr. Lucero calls for people on both sides of the abortion issue to 
join in supporting the Child Custody Protection Act. As he states, 
``The only way we can and should keep abortions legal is to keep them 
safe. To fight laws that would achieve this does no one any good--not 
the pregnant teen-agers, the parents or the pro-choice movement.''
  I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle and on both sides of 
the abortion issue will take seriously Mr. Lucero's point, that the 
health and well-being of the teen-age girls of America is too important 
to allow ideology to keep their parents from fully participating in 
crucial decisions such as whether or not to have an abortion, and I 
urge them to support S. 1645, the Child Custody Protection Act.
  I ask that the full text of Mr. Lucero's article be printed in the 
Record.
  The article follows:

                [From the New York Times, July 12, 1998]

                        Parental Guidance Needed

                          (By Bruce A. Lucero)

       Alexandria, VA.--I am a doctor who performed some 45,000 
     abortions during 15 years in practice in Alabama. Even though 
     I no longer perform abortions, I am still staunchly pro-
     choice.
       But I find that I disagree with many in the pro-choice 
     movement on the issue of parental notification laws for teen-
     agers. Specifically, I support the Child Custody Protection 
     bill now being considered by Congress. Under the legislation, 
     it would be illegal for anyone to accompany a minor across 
     state lines for an abortion if that minor failed to meet the 
     requirement for parental consent or notification in her home 
     state.
       The legislation, which the House is scheduled to vote on 
     this week, is important not only to the health of teen-age 
     girls, but to the pro-choice movement as well.
       Opponents of the measure believe that the bill would simply 
     extend the reach of a state's parental notification or 
     consent law to other states. And they claim that teen-agers 
     would resort to unsafe abortions rather than tell their 
     parents.
       In truth, however, in most cases a parent's input is the 
     best guarantee that a teen-ager will make a decision that is 
     correct for her--be it abortion, adoption or keeping the 
     baby. And it helps guarantee that if a teen-ager chooses an 
     abortion, she will receive appropriate medical care.
       In cases where teen-agers can't tell their parents--because 
     of abuse, for instance--parental notification laws allow 
     teen-agers to petition a judge for a waiver.
       Society has always decided at what age teen-agers should 
     have certain rights--be it the right to drive a car or the 
     right to vote. In the same way, society should determine at 
     what age a minor has the right to an abortion without 
     notifying their parents.
       In almost all cases, the only reason that a teen-age girl 
     doesn't want to tell her parents about her pregnancy is that 
     she feels ashamed and doesn't want to let her parents down.
       But parents are usually the ones who can best help that 
     teen-ager consider her options. And whatever the girl's 
     decision, parents can provide the necessary emotional support 
     and financial assistance. Even in a conservative state like 
     Alabama, I found that parents were almost always supportive.
       If a teen-ager seeks an abortion out of state, however, 
     things become infinitely more complicated. Instead of telling 
     her parents, she may delay her abortion and try to scrape 
     together enough money--usually $150 to $300--herself. As a 
     result, she often waits too long and then has to turn to her 
     parents for help to pay for a more expensive and riskier 
     second-trimester abortion.
       Also, patients who receive abortions at out-of-state 
     clinics frequently do not return for follow-up care, which 
     can lead to dangerous complications. And a teen-ager who has 
     an abortion across state lines without her parents' knowledge 
     is even more unlikely to tell them that she is having 
     complications.
       Ultimately, the pro-choice movement hurts itself by 
     opposing these kinds of laws. I have had many parents sit in 
     my office with their teen-age daughter and say, ``We never 
     thought this would happen to us'' or, ``We were against 
     abortion, but now it is different.''
       The hard truth is that people often become pro-choice only 
     when they experience an unwanted pregnancy or when their 
     daughter does. Too often, pro-choice advocates oppose laws 
     that make common sense simply because the opposition supports 
     or promotes them. The only way we can and should keep 
     abortions legal is to keep them safe. To fight laws that 
     would achieve this end does no one any good--not the pregnant 
     teen-agers, the parents or the pro-choice movement.

                          ____________________