|
California State 2006 -Proposition 85 |
Official Summary, Pros & Cons
Other Resources
UU Reflection...
Visitor's Comments
Join the Discussion!
Official Summary, Pros and Cons
Amends California Constitution prohibiting abortion for unemancipated minor until 48 hours after physician notifies minor’s parent/guardian, except in medical emergency or with parental waiver. Mandates reporting requirements. Authorizes monetary damages against physicians for violation. Fiscal Impact: Potential unknown net state costs of several million dollars annually for health and social services programs, court administration, and state health agency administration combined.
Proposition 85 Summary
(Source: Official CA State Voter Information Guide)
Proposition 85 Analysis
(Source: Official CA State Voter Information Guide)
Proposition 85 Arguments & Rebuttals
(Source: Official CA State Voter Information Guide)
A YES vote on this measure means: The State Constitution would be changed to require that a physician notify, with certain exceptions, a parent or legal guardian of a pregnant minor at least 48 hours before performing an abortion.
A NO vote on this measure means: Minors would continue to receive abortion services to the same extent as adults. Physicians performing abortions for minors would not be subject to notification requirements.
|
Current Programs
|
Follow the Money (for and against this proposition)
To find the information, first click on a "Committee Name" link,
and then select the radio button "Late and $5000+ Contributions Received."
Organizations & individuals FOR Proposition 85
Yes on 85
Yes on 85(en Español)
Parents Right to Know & Child Protection Initiatives
William P. Clark, California Supreme Court Justice (Ret.)
Organizations & Individuals AGAINST Proposition 85
Partial List of Opponents of Prop 85
No on Prop 85
No on Prop 85 ( En Español)
ACLU Southern California
ACLU Northern California
League of Women Voters of California
Planned Parenthood, affiliates of California
Selected Articles, Editorials, Opinions, Reports
Cecile Richards Q&A
Video with president of Planned Parenthood
Prop. 85: Misguided attempt to help girls
Mercury News Editorial
October 12, 2006
Who's Really Behind Prop. 85
No on Prop. 85
Prop. 73 returns as 85
Backers think a law affecting abortions may pass this year.
The Orange County Register, by Martin Wisckol
September 27, 2006
Reflections... UU Commentaries
A Personal Reflection For Proposition 85
By - YOUR NAME HERE -
Member of the UU Church of
A Personal Reflection Opposed to Proposition 85
By - Debbi Steele -
Member of the
Unitarian Universalist Church of Ventura
The good news is that once again voters have an opportunity to defeat an initiative that threatens the safety of thousands of California’s teens. Proposition 85, the “so-called” parental notification initiative, will appear on the November General Election ballot. I’m voting NO on Proposition 85 and urge all of you to do the same.
While laws of this type may sound reasonable, in the real world, they are the wrong answer for California and will put thousands of our most vulnerable teens at risk.
Parents rightfully want to be involved in their teens’ lives but no law can mandate family communication.
Teens already involve their parents in decisions about an unintended pregnancy, for those that don’t, there is generally a really good reason why they can’t. In the real world the teen may fear being kicked out of her home or face violence should she disclose to her family that she’s pregnant. Or worse, a family member may have caused the pregnancy. These teens can’t go to their parents. Prop. 85 could force these vulnerable teens to delay medical care or turn to self-induced or illegal back-alley abortions. Some may even consider suicide.
Californians know that the real answer to teen pregnancy and abortion is strong, caring families and comprehensive sex education, including abstinence and access to contraception – not new laws that would harm our teens. That’s why doctors, nurses, teachers and parents all urge Californians to vote NO on Prop. 85 this November. I urge you to do the same.
The San Jose Mercury News put it this way: “Prop. 85 … is part of a larger strategy to chip away at legalized abortion in the United States.”
According to an August report by the state Department of Health, teen pregnancy rates in California have dropped by 46 percent over the last ten years. This drop occurred without laws like Prop. 85.
As a Unitarian Universalists, we know the inherent worth and dignity of every person and the importance of justice, equality and compassion in human relations. Because of our strong principles, I urge you to vote NO on Proposition 85. For more information on the opponents of this bill contact www.NoOn85.
Visitor's Comment List
Visitor Name: brian brackney
Congregation:
This is my personal reflection in support of propsition 85. I support proposition 85 as part of a general opposition to the use of violence to solve problems. i can be seen protesting the death penalty at san quinten at protests at lawrence livermore labroritories.
I feel that many parents would seek non violent solutions tio their teen daughters pregnancies if they knew.
I agree with ms steele that strong caring families are needed to reduce the number of abortions. that should include a restoration of the extended family structure of the past.
many parents also would not sign for their children to join the military .
After the election we will need some closure on the culture war that has divided our country for a generation. Both cultural left AND the cultural right have failed in offering a vision of a caring society.
I do feelwe need a compassionate sexual ethic offering a middle wy between the puritanism of the cultural right and the hedonism of the cultural left. one that rejects homophobia stigmatizing single moms etc yet also offers something more in sexuality beyond physical gratification. This is also the best case for gay marriage
one final pointno matter what one's views personal attacks on
supporters of proposition 85 should have no place in the debate over it. These are irrelevant just as the "communists support the nuclear freeze" arguments were irrelevent a generattion ago during the last years of the cold war. Ideas should be csupported on their merits and not on who supports or opposes them
UU Legislative Ministry
717 K St # 514
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 441-0018
admin@uulmca.org