7.2 F
Chicago
Tuesday, January 31, 2023
HomeHealth CareNew: Mainstream Media Mislead On New Study of Illinois Parental Involvement Law

New: Mainstream Media Mislead On New Study of Illinois Parental Involvement Law

Date:

spot_img

Abortion-Law-900

By Michael J. New - 

In December, the Journal Of Adolescent Health published a study analyzing the impact of Illinois’ pro-life parental involvement law which took effect in 2013. The media spin is the parental involvement law purportedly had no impact on the decisional certainty of girls who obtained abortions. Additionally, some media reports indicate the law had little impact on the amount of parental support for minors who had abortions. This study has been covered by a number of media outlets including ReutersElite Daily, and Think Progress.

When this law took effect in 2013, Illinois became the 38th state to enforce a pro-life parental involvement law. The law was actually passed by the state legislature and signed by the Governor back in 1995. However, legal challenges delayed the enforcement of the law for 18 years. Still, the enforcement of the law was an important victory for pro-lifers. For a long time, Illinois was the only state in the Midwest that was not enforcing a parental involvement law. As such, the state became an abortion magnet for minors seeking to circumvent parental involvement laws in nearby states.

The study considers data from only one abortion facility in southern Illinois. However, it includes data on 538 minors who obtained abortions over a three year timespan.   The results are instructive. Most importantly, the number of abortions performed on minors fell by 29 percent in the year after the law took effect. Considering that all other midwestern states are enforcing parental involvement laws, it seems unlikely that a large number of Illinois minors are obtaining abortions in other states.  Additionally, the percentage of minors who involved a parent in their abortion decision increased from 71 percent to 93 percent after the law took effect.

Interestingly, the study finds that after the law took effect, only 1.4 percent of minors obtained judicial bypass and did not have to involve their parents. Judicial bypass provisions are included in nearly all parental involvement laws and allow minors in abusive situations to receive permission to obtain an abortion from a judge. Some pro-lifers have criticized the enforcement of judicial bypass provisions — stating that they make it too easy for minor girls to obtain abortions. However, this study shows few Illinois minors utilize this option.

Opponents of parental involvement laws often argue that they result in minors obtaining abortions later in pregnancy.  However,  the enactment of the Illinois parental involvement law did not significantly change the mean gestational age at which abortions performed on minors took place. Furthermore, there was only a slight increase in the percentage of abortions that took place in the second trimester.  Many media outlets are making much of the fact that the parental involvement law did not improve the decisional certainty of minors who sought abortions.  However, the percentage of minors who felt” very sure” of their decision fell only slightly – from 77 percent to 71 percent.

Parental involvement laws have been an important incremental strategy for pro-lifers.  Thirty eight states have parental involvement laws in effect and state level parental involvement laws have been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court on a number of occasions.  Peer reviewed studies have found that parental involvement laws reduce both teen suicide rates and teen STD rates. Most importantly, this study adds to a substantial body of public health research which shows parental involvement laws protect both minors and their unborn children by reducing the incidence of abortion among minors.

##

Michael J. New is an Associate Professor of Economics at Ave Maria University and an Associate Scholar at the Charlotte Lozier Institute. Follow him on Twitter @Michael_J_New

Link to Journal of Adolescent Health article

http://www.jahonline.org/article/S1054-139X(17)30502-5/abstract

Link to the Reuters article

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-teens-abortions/parental-notification-law-appears-to-limit-delay-abortions-idUSKBN1EJ0QO

Link to the Elite Daily article

https://www.elitedaily.com/p/do-minors-need-parental-involvement-for-abortion-these-laws-can-present-barriers-7644248\

Link to the Think Progress

https://thinkprogress.org/parental-notification-laws-delay-access-abortion

Subscribe

- Never miss a story with notifications

- Gain full access to our premium content

- Browse free from up to 5 devices at once

Latest stories

1 COMMENT

  1. Denial for parental authority is yet another ruse of the loony left to breakdown the nuclear family. The assault on normality is the driving force behind these and other anti-family attacks.
    Like so much of the pseudo-social science “research” the research design is flawed. It is a non-experimental “study” and hence is very dubious scientifically. The Journal of Adolescent Health article claims the “researchers” analyzed administrative and medical records of 1,577 women, etc.
    This is usually called “meta-research” meaning that it is analyzing data of others arrived at previously and hence being reworked; the errors creep in because of the biases of the researchers themselves. The oddest part is that it is data from ONE facility and that always poses problems in “social” research…the place might be an oddball one to begin with!
    The difference-in-differences framework simply means the “researchers” are using observational data selected by the researchers. This technique actually comes from the field of economics…but so many faux researchers use just about everything up to and including the kitchen sink to prove their useless pet theories.
    The big problem here is endogeneity which means that there is likely at least one confounding aspect which is both a dependent and independent variable!
    I did not intend to get technical but I wanted to provide some basis for readers to reconsider this article.