This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Kevin E. Glancy, MD
Macungie, Pa

JAMA. 1993;269(17):2210.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.

—I wish to raise several objections to the opinions expressed by the Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs¹ regarding parental consent for abortion.

I do not believe that the conclusions reached by the Council are consistent with their own arguments. Repeatedly throughout the Council Report, parents are noted to be the persons from whom a minor will most often receive appropriate counseling. And further, they point out that minors frequently have erroneous preconceptions regarding negative responses from their parents regarding pregnancy, which will (despite physician encouragement to the contrary) most likely not allow helpful parental involvement. Thus, in order to deal with the remaining minority, the Council concludes that parental involvement should not be required and ignores legal mechanisms already in place protecting abused minors.

The Council also places consent for abortion in a totally different category from all other consents for medical procedures. The Council . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?