Way back in early December, The Daily Campus Editorial Board illuminated the issues of parental notification and consent for minors attempting to have an abortion. Ed Board felt that it was “not right for legislators to require” that a minor inform her parents before seeking an abortion. I respectfully disagree with the Ed Board on this issue.

I will focus more on consent than notification because consent implies notification. As long as abortion is legal, the least we can do is require that a girl obtain consent from a parent before performing the procedure.

Before I begin my point, here a few basic ground rules and points. First, I realize fully that the sexual act that results in a pregnancy in danger of being aborted is a two-person act. I hold both the male and female equally accountable. Just because the baby happens to develop inside the woman shouldn’t make her somehow the guilty party.

Secondly, in reading my argument I know there are exceptions that could be made. There are people with parents who are unfit to make such a decision. I happen to believe that abortion is not necessary or justifiable in 99 percent of cases. That does leave a little room for error.

However, our society should not make rules for everyone based on the exceptions of a few. We should make laws that are based on principles and then create exceptions in extremely rare cases for the rare few who need them.

Much of our modern society is built upon the notion that a child only becomes an adult when he or she reaches the age of 18. Our society recognizes that minors often do not have the same maturity and decision-making capability as adults. This is reflected in our laws. In a recent Supreme Court ruling on the juvenile death penalty, Roper v. Simmons, Justice Kennedy stated that juveniles are less mature than adults and more susceptible to peer pressure.

If this logic can work for juvenile death penalty cases, it can be applied to juveniles who are essentially deciding whether to put their unborn baby on death row. In other words, how can our government place full responsibility for an abortion decision on a child while denying the child’s full responsibility for crimes committed outside the womb?

The “rights of a minor” desired by abortion activists creates problems in other areas of our system. Remember what it was like to take a school field trip? Remember the annoying liability release forms that Mommy and Daddy had to sign to let you travel to the aquarium with your class? How unintentionally backwards a society can be when it permits minors to have abortions but not go on field trips without consent.

The list goes on and on and on. Minors do not file their own taxes. Minors do not enter military service. Minors cannot buy a drink at a bar. Legally speaking, minors do not have full responsibility for their actions.

These are generalities that do not apply in all situations, but this action is like permitting a child to read Shakespeare without first teaching him or her to understand Dr. Seuss. It’s absolutely putting the cart before the horse.

Abortion activists in favor of extending what has become known as the “right to choose” to minors want to focus on abortion alone. Their argument is much easier to pick apart when viewed in a greater context.

We cannot allow minors to make decisions about the rights of another human being while denying them the ability to control their own lives. That is pure hypocrisy.

Reed Hanson is a featured columnist on Wednesdays. He is a sophomore electrical engineering major and may be reached at [email protected].