Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: House Republicans proposed their own one-year tax cut a couple of months before they derided Pritzker’s one-year tax cuts as “one-time tricks”
Next Post: COVID-19 roundup: Hospitalizations fall 31 percent since last Friday
Posted in:
* OK, let me start out by saying that I’m not trying to pick on one particular candidate here. And I’m not trying to take sides in this debate. But these talking points are widely used and listening to this interview prompted me to go look up the actual laws. From WGN political reporter Tahman Bradley’s interview of Richard Irvin…
Bradley: Illinois law would protect a woman’s right to an abortion. Even if Roe v Wade, were overturned. Will you work to repeal or protect Illinois abortion law?
Irvin: I’m pro-life. And I think we can all agree on both sides of the aisle and parents across our state, the legislation that JB Pritzker signed giving a teenager the right to get an abortion without the notification of the parents is atrocious. A child can get an aspirin in school without their parents notification or consent. Yet, because we’ve signed a law that allows a teenager 12, 13, 14, 15 years old to walk into an abortion clinic and get a serious medical procedure without their parent be notified. That’s absolutely wrong. That’s extreme. Should that law be repealed? That law should absolutely be repealed.
105 ILCS 5/10-22.21b…
To provide for the administration of medication to students. It shall be the policy of the State of Illinois that the administration of medication to students during regular school hours and during school-related activities should be discouraged unless absolutely necessary for the critical health and well-being of the student. Under no circumstances shall teachers or other non-administrative school employees, except certified school nurses and non-certificated registered professional nurses, be required to administer medication to students. This Section shall not prohibit a school district from adopting guidelines for self-administration of medication by students that are consistent with this Section and this Code.
* Back to Tahman’s interview…
Bradley: So you will make some adjustments then to the abortion laws on the books in Illinois?
Irvin: As I said, I think most any parent around the state will agree that their teenagers shouldn’t be able to walk in and get a serious medical procedure without them even being notified.
* From an Illinois Caucus for Adolescent Health publication entitled “Healthcare Rights of Youth in Illinois,” updated in 2018…
• General Healthcare
o No consent needed by parent or guardian if a minor is married, pregnant, or a parent. Consent is needed for minors if they do not meet these qualifications.
So, a pregnant minor could already get general medical services on her own without her parents’ knowledge or consent, including having the baby at a hospital. The list of non-notification services available to pregnant minors was expanded last year to include abortion.
Other medical services that any minor can receive without parental notification or consent as of 2018: Pregnancy testing, prenatal care, emergency contraception, STI/HIV testing and treatment (12 and older), substance use treatment (12 and older).
More here from the Illinois Hospital Association.
Again, this is not about Irvin alone. Try to keep that in mind when you comment.
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 11:53 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: House Republicans proposed their own one-year tax cut a couple of months before they derided Pritzker’s one-year tax cuts as “one-time tricks”
Next Post: COVID-19 roundup: Hospitalizations fall 31 percent since last Friday
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
When a politician refuses to acknowledge the circumstances that would cause a teen girl to not want to report a pregnancy to her parents, I often can’t tell whether they are just wildly ignorant of what could be happening in that home, if they are supportive of what could be happening in that home, or they just don’t care.
Comment by Homebody Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 12:09 pm
Just because he picked the wrong law to compare doesn’t mean he is law. Those under 18 can’t get a piercing without parental consent, but they can undergo an invasive abortion without even notification of the parent? 720 ILCS 5/12C-40
Comment by Simply Sayin' Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 12:14 pm
*doesn’t mean he is wrong. (No, he’s definitely not law.)
Comment by Simply Sayin' Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 12:16 pm
” … I think most any parent around the state will agree that their teenagers shouldn’t be able to walk in and get a serious medical procedure without them even being notified.”
When you have millions of parents, once in a blue moon there is a Josef Fritzl - hence the law.
Comment by Anyone Remember Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 12:21 pm
I think it would be difficult to find a school that would give an aspirin in almost any situation, especially without notifying the parents. Maybe you could in a rare case but not easy. But a baby can be killed in the womb from a child’s womb with no notification. Hopefully, they would notify the parents if something went wrong with their child while ending the life of their grandchild.
Comment by Fan Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 12:22 pm
He is a lawyer - shouldn’t he know the law?
Comment by Kool Aid Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 12:23 pm
==He is a lawyer - shouldn’t he know the law? ==
It’s never been a requirement.
Comment by Arsenal Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 12:23 pm
**Those under 18 can’t get a piercing without parental consent, but they can undergo an invasive abortion without even notification of the parent? 720 ILCS 5/12C-40**
Sigh… but are you fine if a pregnant teenager can get care without parental notification?
Comment by SaulGoodman Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 12:25 pm
@ Simply Sayin’
Your argument suggests parents have authority over children, and should in most cases. Children should not be pierced or tattooed or allowed an abortion without parental consent, until they are 18.
Following this logic, if parental authority exists until 18, then there are two related concerns:
(1) Should a parent be able to compel a child to have an abortion if pregnant?
(2) Should a parent be able to prevent a child from having an abortion?
Comment by H-W Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 12:26 pm
Irvin, like all politicians (including JB) deal in generalities, platform issues, talking points, and narratives. He’s not wrong in illustrating that IL has the most expansive abortion access in the country. Voters will get that. All the nuance and research on his talking points are interesting but voters in aggregate don’t do that.
Comment by Donnie Elgin Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 12:28 pm
What did he contribute to the conversation or do when the law was being debated? We all know he was in Springfield a few times, we saw him out partying. The more he talks, the less likely it seems like he’ll come out of the primary as the winner.
Comment by DissapointedVoter Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 12:28 pm
==== He is a lawyer - shouldn’t he know the law? ===
So is Tom Devore.
Comment by The Way I See It Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 12:29 pm
You really can’t tell the difference between needing parental consent for a voluntary cosmetic procedure like piercing, and requiring parental consent for a procedure like abortion, when many younger teenagers who require abortions require them because they have been sexually abused by a family member?
Or is it just that you think that rapists should get to decide whether their daughters have to be pregnant with their own half-sister, because they’re the parent and parental rights trump all?
Comment by Suburban Mom Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 12:32 pm
This goes to all GOP candidates to this, including Irvin, not exclusive *to* Irvin.
The spin is simple, it’s not that the law reads “this” or “that” or understanding “notification” or whatever…
The politics, it’s about “parents” and it’s about “not my kid”, and it’s about “libs taking away control”
It’s trying to bake a cake in VA with CRT… it’s under a guise of “controlling my family” or “oh no, not doing that to my child”
It’s not about applying the law, and it’s certainty not about…
“Republicans are dangerous to women’s health”
They can’t have that narrative if the Clarence Thomas Court all but overturns Roe.
It’s staving off suburban women leaving in droves if the narrative can be about taking rights away from families and how children are being put in a place where parents lose control.
I know, “crime”… I know… I need to “just wait”… it’s all about crime.
Welp, we saw how Irvin has handled abortion, and we might see how all GOP candidates, on their own, are gonna have to handle if Roe is fully attacked… “so are you going to require a 13 year old child… to have a child?”.
This is changing a whole conversation, not a law, what a law says, how a law is applied…
But… it’s still crime… well, maybe… not?
That’s what I think I see here.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 12:36 pm
As I like to point out, the ‘ban’ on medicine at schools is largely an issue of liability. The other part I usually leave out is that much of the effort to ban OTC medications from schools is based on some idea that school administration cannot distinguish between OTC drugs and illegal drugs which is really telling how little the districts think of their own administrators.
===invasive abortion
Important to note both invasive and non-invasive abortions are legal. Also, the list of medical services available to minors is much more than just abortion. In fact, pregnant or teens with children may control their own health care regardless of the health care they are receiving. IOW, abortion isn’t an exception, by removing the parental notification requirement, abortion is treated as other health care during pregnancy.
Comment by ArchPundit Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 12:36 pm
Also, not sure if you know this, but pregnancy is itself more invasive and involves a heck of a lot more invasive procedures that an abortion. If your objection is to invasive procedures, abortion is typically a minor one-time invasive procedure, well pregnancy involves repeated invasive procedures and causes permanent and irreversible changes to the body. Should teenagers be allowed to choose to undergo so many invasive procedures without parental consent? Or, more to the point, should they be forced to undergo all those procedures against their own consent because their parents want to force them?
Comment by Suburban Mom Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 12:38 pm
I am not aware of any age restriction for purchasing aspirin. There would be nothing that would prevent a minor from purchasing their own aspirin and taking it to school with them.
I seem to have memories of student athletes in high school self medicating their own aches and pains with regularity.
As I will continue to say, the GOP plans on gaslighting voters as their official strategy for 2022 and here is an example of a popular talking point that no one has bothered fact checking or even thinking about in the context of their own life experience.
Comment by Candy Dogood Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 12:43 pm
===I am not aware of any age restriction for purchasing aspirin. There would be nothing that would prevent a minor from purchasing their own aspirin and taking it to school with them.
A lot of schools/most do not allow OTC anymore because apparently school administrators are unable to tell the difference between illicit drugs and OTC.
Comment by ArchPundit Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 12:44 pm
===can’t get a piercing===
Last I checked, piercings aren’t medical procedures.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 12:44 pm
On the more general point of the law, I think children and teenagers need more control over their own healthcare, not less. And that is definitely the trend in pediatrics, where our pediatricians began asking our children for consent to examine them when they were about 4 years old, and explaining to them how consent works, that it is their body, and that while parents and doctors sometimes need to make decisions, the child controls his own body. As we have entered the teen years, or pediatricians have told our children what health care they can seek without parental consent, that they can always send their parent in a hallway, that they have a right to talk to the doctor without a parent present, and then anything they tell the doctor is a secret between them and the doctor. We find this appropriate, and an important part of teaching our children to be responsible and to make good choices.
When we had to make a decision about remote learning for last year, We laid out the pros and cons for our 8 and 10-year-old, made clear to them that as parents we would make the final decision because we were ultimately responsible for their safety and health, but that they were old enough to have some input into the decision and we wanted them to participate with us in making it. Fortunately, they wanted to remain remote, which was what we felt was safer. But it was good for us to hear their own concerns and their risk assessment. It gave them a sense of control in a difficult and crazy time when everything was out of control, and it made us feel more confident in our decision to keep them remote, because they participated in the decision and were comfortable with it.
When these debates focus around parents making medical decisions for their teenagers and overruling those teenagers, it often feels very backwards and old fashioned to me. Pediatrics has moved down from that, doctors educate parents about that, and children today have and should have a voice in their own care and treatment. Sometimes these political conversations remind me of Mad Men, when Betty’s doctors talk to Don and didn’t talk to Betty. It just seems so backwards, and like something out of a different time.
Comment by Suburban Mom Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 12:50 pm
come on with this post… really splitting hairs here. its about parental notification.
Comment by CCrider Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 12:50 pm
==All the nuance and research on his talking points are interesting but voters in aggregate don’t do that. ==
Irvin is asking them to do so, though. If all the voters think about on this issue is that Irvin is pro-life, well, most of them aren’t. Irvin is asking them to drill down into the specifics of parental notification, and then getting those specifics wrong.
Comment by Arsenal Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 12:52 pm
In terms of other GOP gubernatorial candidates, they do not seem to have active PR crews, to respond to such comments and Irvin evading whether he supports any abortion. Didn’t see this either yesterday, with Irvin abruptly ending the interview when asked about abortion. That’s campaign wheelhouse material for anti-abortion people. Good campaigns would release statements at least. Where is the pouncing?
Comment by Grandson of Man Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 12:54 pm
If Republicans want this to be about making sure children are having children… that might not work.
The party that encourages families to making teen pregnancies go full term to own the libs.
I mean, in Texas, the rape aspect of exception is moot as Texas’ governor stated rape is not allowed in Texas… anymore.
The real change to this all will be after SCOTUS rules on *both* cases in front of them.
The winding, long winded, Republicans are about other things to an untrue narrative, that’s the best chance.
A direct answer is a pitfall, like, if a parent consents, and an abortion takes place, will those same Republicans be fine with that?
Well, now that’s a discussion to abortion. That’s no help, so, let’s keep it at… “notifications”
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 12:54 pm
== Illinois law would protect a woman’s right to an abortion. Even if Roe v Wade, were overturned. ==
I’ve been wondering, do abortion rights groups and the Dems wish they waited on repealing the state’s Roe trigger law? If Roe is overturned this summer, abortion is going to become a big national issue that will help Dems in what otherwise looks like a tough year. But the issue will be less salient here because abortion won’t become illegal. If the trigger law was still on the books, its repeal would be the biggest issue of the election year, which would really help Dem candidates, particularly in the burbs.
Comment by Telly Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 12:55 pm
===But the issue will be less salient here because…===
It won’t. Actually the opposite.
“Why?”
The direct question to these rulings… “do you agree with…”
Dodging it, in any way, could hurt with “base” GOP voters, moderates, it changes things because the ambiguity and “what if” are now gone.
“Will you try to get those laws that were upheld by the US Supreme Court here in Illinois, do you support that effort?”
It’s like watching weather that is gonna hit, the question is how bad will the weather be and can we prepare for the damage now.
Thus… it’s about parents rights.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 1:00 pm
==do abortion rights groups and the Dems wish they waited on repealing the state’s Roe trigger law?==
I’m sure the abortion rights groups would rather have the right protected.
Dems may think that they want the issue, but with it in the national atmosphere and with IL pro-life groups advocating to take advantage of any moves, they’ll have it either way.
Comment by Arsenal Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 1:01 pm
==apparently school administrators are unable to tell the difference between illicit drugs and OTC.==
Not to mention the liability, but do you want to be the one to call the parent of an adolescent who overdoses on fentanyl saying “But it says BAYER right there on the pill (exclamation point)”
Comment by Jocko Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 1:09 pm
No, we don’t all agree Mr Irvin. Young girls shouldn’t be forced to give birth to their rapists’ babies.
Comment by Cheryl44 Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 1:10 pm
Cheryl44, thank you for saying that. Too often people assume their opinion is universally held.
Comment by Lt Guv Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 1:34 pm
====Not to mention the liability
I think with self-administration the liability is pretty low. What I’m referring to is a student cannot have ibuprofen in the locker or backpack in most schools.
Comment by ArchPundit Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 1:38 pm
- rapists’ babies.-
What you are referring is an actual crime that should be reported, not swept under the rug with silence and a secret abortion. Are abortion providers mandatory reporters?
Comment by Hair On Fire Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 1:43 pm
Yet Beetle can’t even respond to the statements, something which should be within his wheelhouse when addressing his base. Instead, he twits, “Perhaps they should send Democrat Irvin back to the basement with his boy Joe Biden. . .”
I trust he fully realizes that statement could be perceived as having tripped the wire on racism. What a jerk. I’ll say it again, Beetle & Devore deserve each other.
Comment by Lt Guv Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 1:46 pm
First, right there with Cheryl44, a parent of a girl who does not agree with Irvin’s take.
Second, and it’s nitpicky—aspirin is a terrible example. Kids shouldn’t be taking aspirin without input from someone with knowledge of their recent health history, which a a school nurse won’t have, due to the known risk of Reyes Syndrome. Prohibition on dispensing aspirin is based on sound medical advice.
Comment by Chris Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 1:50 pm
===… not swept under the rug with silence and a secret abortion===
Ok, now how do you reconcile if a parent won’t give consent for an abortion, for any reason, you choose, and the child now will have a pregnancy go full term?
No snark or any ill will, I’d like to hear your thoughts to that.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 1:57 pm
=And I think we can all agree on both sides of the aisle and parents across our state, the legislation that JB Pritzker signed giving a teenager the right to get an abortion without the notification of the parents is atrocious.=
No, we cannot and do not. when this legislation was signed, I was not happy about the notification component, but my relationship with my kids is pretty good. I am strict in certain regards when it comes to things like honesty and respect. But I am not heavy handed with discipline, especially when they self report something like a speeding ticket etc.
But when this was first discussed here, Candy Dogood pointed out that not all parents have those relationships (and admittedly mine may not be what I think it is in their eyes). My kids know our house is a safe place for them. Candy pointed out that isn’t true for all kids and it may even be family that caused the issue in the first place. Candy made a compelling argument that caused me to rethink my position.
So not, we all don’t agree. Not even close.
=A lot of schools/most do not allow OTC anymore because apparently school administrators are unable to tell the difference between illicit drugs and OTC.=
First, for all of the “experts” out there, it isn’t the admin that are giving kids medication, be it OTC or Rx. It is the office staff or nurse.
Liability is an issue and we are not here to dispense medical services, we are here to teach. They are your kids and your responsibility. Responsibility does not mean ownership.
We do, under certain guidelines dispense medications. Signed consent for minors is standard practice for any organization that does not enjoyed being sued by ineffective parents looking for a scapegoat. DeVore is among a legion of ambulance chasers out there looking to dig into our insurance companies and Tort fund.
= There would be nothing that would prevent a minor from purchasing their own aspirin and taking it to school with them.=
Most districts have Board Policy that requires signed permission and that even OTC medication be kept in the office. Check your district, it would be policy 7:270.
Maybe it comes as a shock to some, but kids abuse OTC meds every single day. Use the google and see what they are doing with Robitussin and Nyquil.
I would be willing to wager with any of you that I could create a lineup of OTC and RX meds (including Oxy) and you could not tell the difference between them. We do that as part of our training for staff with our local health department. If you can’t tell the difference what make you think we can? My aspirin looks identical to my metformin.
Comment by JS Mill Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 1:58 pm
===No, he’s definitely not law.===
I mean, he called out the National Guard. Maybe he is law.
+1 to everything said by Suburban Mom @ 12:50 pm
===do abortion rights groups and the Dems wish they waited on repealing the state’s Roe trigger law===
It may make for politics, but I imagine that the person seeking services in the intervening months, as the GA fights over the issue with a possible Republican governor, would prefer the stability and certainty of established law.
To the post: so much emphasis on abortions, and too little on preventing unwanted pregnancies. If you really want to reduce the number of abortions, make abortions widely available, and/or reduce childhood trauma, we need better sex education, better access to contraceptives, better respect for women in society, destigmatized non-traditional roles and relationships, and possibly legalized and regulated prostitution to provide a safe outlet for consenting parties.
Also, I am disappointed that vaccinations still require parental consent until 18. I think we can all agree on both sides of the aisle and parents across our state, if a teen can drive a car or have an abortion, they should be able to protect themselves against preventable illnesses when their parents will not.
Comment by thechampaignlife Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 2:02 pm
“I trust he fully realizes that statement could be perceived as having tripped the wire on racism.”
It’s awful, just like the Satan racist trope. That kind of talk should be condemned, and Bailey should apologize.
Comment by Grandson of Man Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 2:04 pm
==Last I checked, piercings aren’t medical procedures.==
Back when I was in grade school, I think most of the girls were getting their piercings from a Dr. Claire S. Boutique. Seemed to have a thriving practice.
Comment by Roadrager Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 2:04 pm
@suburbanmom
So very well put. Thank you for such a thoughtful set of posts.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 2:22 pm
—-Are abortion providers mandatory reporters?
Nearly all medical providers are including doctors and nurses.
Comment by ArchPundit Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 3:12 pm
- how do you reconcile -
Crime is committed, cops get involved, prosecutor, offender arrested, victim goes before a judge and is granted emergency abortion. I just think the family rapist is a bad example, a crime shouldn’t be covered up, then you end up sending the girl right back into the environment where it happened.
Comment by Hair On Fire Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 3:13 pm
==a crime shouldn’t be covered up==
It doesn’t cover up any crime, though.
Comment by Arsenal Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 3:14 pm
===I just think the family rapist is a bad example, a crime shouldn’t be covered up===
I don’t think you grasp how this all works.
===then you end up sending the girl right back into the environment where it happened.===
Can you explain how this works if the child seeks an abortion, without consent?
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 3:16 pm
—-First, for all of the “experts” out there, it isn’t the admin that are giving kids medication, be it OTC or Rx. It is the office staff or nurse.
This misses my point. Having ibuprofen in a kid’s locker is also forbidden in most schools. I’m not talking about administering drugs, but whether students can take things like Mucinex or Ibuprofen on their own. For high school students there is no reason for this prohibition except the fear over how it might be used to hide illicit drugs despite many, many ways to do that.
Comment by ArchPundit Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 3:16 pm
These days it seems no candidate can be a Republican without passing the litmus tests of no abortion, no rights for gays, fealty to Trump, and so forth. I can no longer support any Republican candidate because of their stance on these social issues. As to abortion, I do not wish to see it legislated out of existence despite my personal objection to it. If you don’t want to have an abortion, don’t. But don’t deny it to everyone. As to parental notification, I’m sure instances exist where a minor can’t notify a parent due to abuse, incest, extreme religious views, etc. Therefore, I support the law in IL as it stands. There is nothing that says a minor can’t have the discussion and decision making process with their parents. Hopefully, a majority of parents are good enough parents that their children would ask for their help.
Comment by Manchester Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 3:39 pm
you are running for Governor, not Commander, Mayor Irvin.
Comment by Amalia Friday, Feb 4, 22 @ 3:50 pm