On Nov. 2, the Alaska Supreme Court ruled by a 3-2 margin that the state law requiring parental consent for a child's abortion is unconstitutional. Saying that the Alaska Constitution denies parents the right to control a serious medical procedure on a minor is a travesty. It is nothing more than another example of our courts using the Constitution as a club to justify the pro-abortion agenda.
Sound off on the important issues at
A great deal of effort was made in crafting this law to include a judicial bypass provision accepted by the U.S. Supreme Court. However, that made no difference to Alaska's Supreme Court Justices Dana Fabe, Robert Eastaugh and Alexander Bryner. The justices making this decision expressed their support of parental rights but that was only an attempt to sound reasonable and provide cover for the decision that followed.
Their characterization of parental notification as meeting a compelling parental interest in the welfare of the minor child versus parental consent with a judicial bypass provision is simply false. When abortion is the subject everything changes. Abortion receives special consideration and protection.
This decision makes a mockery of the idea that parents have the right and responsibility to make medical decisions for their children. In this case we are talking about a life and death decision with the potential of lifelong harm to the girl. This decision rightfully deserves contempt and condemnation by anyone concerned about parental rights and the welfare of our society.
Sidney D. Heidersdorf