Parents? what are they?

JaniceM

JaniceM

Well-known Member
Location
still lost between two shores..
Until a person reaches the age of majority, the parent/parents are responsible for the person- legally and morally. (unless the person, with parental consent, gets married, joins the military, etc.) So with that in mind, what do you guys think about this, and what does your state say about it?:

Quite a few years ago, I started noticing teens (minors) are encouraged to 'take charge of their own health care'- make/keep dr appointments, etc.- parental knowledge/involvement no longer necessary.
To do this without parental knowledge has come from ads on t.v., mailouts from clinics, etc.
In addition, if the minor for whom you are responsible does take this course of action, you the parent do not even have the right to know about it- your 'child' could have a serious medical/health condition, could be taking prescription medications with possible side-effects, etc., but it's allegedly none of your business.
Frankly I believe this entire approach is flat-out wrong- and could even be dangerous.

This area is very much anti-family, 'parent' means nothing more than paying the bills. So I'm wondering if this approach is only here, or in other parts of the U.S. too.
 

Not every parent acts in the best interests of their offspring. A lot of the children for whom this provision is made are from very dysfunctional homes and some of these have run away because of abusive family members. The medical staff need some kind of indemnity to be able to treat them.
 
Warrigal said:
Not every parent acts in the best interests of their offspring. A lot of the children for whom this provision is made are from very dysfunctional homes and some of these have run away because of abusive family members. The medical staff need some kind of indemnity to be able to treat them.
Click to expand...

In those types of cases, some adult should be in charge- but what about parents who actually do care?
 

Gillick competent

JaniceM said:
In those types of cases, some adult should be in charge- but what about parents who actually do care?
Click to expand...


In the UK the only sense I've heard of this happening concerns access to abortions without the parent's knowledge under a law called "Gillick competent".

The name refers to Victoria Gillick, a mother of five girls I believe, who back in the 1970s/1980s challenged the right of the local doctors to give this advice to her children, and as she argued her case very well actually won in our courts to begin with at least. In very short order our houses of parliament introduced legislation overturning the judges decision, so that doctors can give the advice to any child, though maybe with some cautions as to whether the children are mature enough to make decisions on their own, and try to encourage the child to involve the parent perhaps.

As far as I know that is how the law stands to this day, but I haven't heard any controversy here that it has spread into other areas involving the child's health, though it may have done.
 
That is pretty much how it works over here too Graham. It happens mostly in the area of birth control and abortion services for girls who are not living at home and who are at risk. Advice would come from social workers in the first instance. I have not seen any TV ads or mail outs from clinics. The latter seems counterproductive unless the minor person had an out of home address.
 
Too many parents have become used to and actually want society doing their job. What was the exception has now become the rule. School should be as much about making/teaching kids to become independent, support themselves etc not make them dependent on a third party.

I'm witnessing an issue now where the mom & boyfriend want to move when her young adult daughter hasn't even graduated community college yet. They're moving because they want to, not for job reasons. Both are alcoholics. Point being the child had delinquency issues and flunked high school which is pretty hard to do in this day and age. Knowing her issues and background shouldn't they do everything including not moving as to not upset the young adult's schooling?

Should the mom and boyfriend stay put to help ensure the young adult graduates so they have something to start life out with. Especially after a troubled childhood they helped create/fester.
 
Yes, I agree they should, but, this reminds me of all the cases you read about the "boyfriend" becoming the priority over one's own children. Selfish and very sad for the children in this situation.
 
WhatInThe said:
Too many parents have become used to and actually want society doing their job. What was the exception has now become the rule. School should be as much about making/teaching kids to become independent, support themselves etc not make them dependent on a third party.

I'm witnessing an issue now where the mom & boyfriend want to move when her young adult daughter hasn't even graduated community college yet. They're moving because they want to, not for job reasons. Both are alcoholics. Point being the child had delinquency issues and flunked high school which is pretty hard to do in this day and age. Knowing her issues and background shouldn't they do everything including not moving as to not upset the young adult's schooling?

Should the mom and boyfriend stay put to help ensure the young adult graduates so they have something to start life out with. Especially after a troubled childhood they helped create/fester.
Click to expand...

This may sound really cold -- but I think there's a point where the parents are entitled to live their OWN lives, and the adult child must take responsibility for her own life. I'm sure the young adult bears some responsibility for her own flunking out of high school. They could help her out, but I don't think parents are forever obligated to coddle their children -- I even think that is many times doing the adult child a disservice. Maybe this young woman is better off without the influence of two alcoholics in her life.
 

Back
Top