Thank you for your input. I think the angle of compassionately offering confidential medical help to teenagers is the angle one of my progressive friends suggested to me.

But, one problem I have is this: If someone who is 13 years old (and remember, the NY bill S4779 does not even say an age, could be younger…but) if someone who is 13 years old is allowed to seek medical help with their own decision, then shouldn’t that person also be able to: vote, drive a car, decide if they can use alcohol, etc.

There is a disconnect with believing that someone that age has the capacity to making a rational decision about their sexuality and their medical health entirely alone, but not saying that they are adults or full citizens in other areas.

It is like the government, or health care workers, are trying to jump in and usurp the place of parents, but not take the full responsibility, and not give all the privileges.

It is murky ground.

I want to say another example that I think of a lot. When I was younger, there was a girl about 15 years old was known by all of us to have had multiple abortions because she had sex with her father. We all knew through rumor and gossip (which looking back, I see was supported as truth by events I knew). But, someone gave a 15-year-old these multiple abortions and did not look into if a crime was committed, or if she needed other help overcoming her sad existence.

I think we need to rethink how we (as a government or society) offer charity to young people by closing our eyes to the full situations they present us with. If some person or entity gives a 15-year-old an abortion, seems like they are hurting that 15-year-old-child psychologically if they do not find out the age of the father, and find out if the young woman needs help.

I think in trying to be helpful, confidential, and permissive, many people ignore these core issues, and do more harm than good.

Glad you found the story. And, thanks for sharing your perspective. You put it there with links, so I would say that covers it.

The purpose of this site is to cover third parties. So, it would be difficult to insert the story you are telling into a regular post, unless there was a third party endorsement or tie-in.

But, again, glad you put it up.

(You do see that my article covers the PRO allow kids to do vaccines and CON allow kids to do vaccines, and that it leans toward NOT liking vaccines?)

-KW

http://industry.bnet.com/pharma/10006588/new-york-bills-would-mandate-hpv-vaccines-without-parents-consent/

Excerpt:

“Even without the inevitable controversy over whether under-18s should be able to get preventive care from their doctors without their parents hearing the details of their sex lives, the bills read like full-employment acts for Merck (MRK)’s Gardasil and GlaxoSmithKline (GSK)’s Cervarix.”

Thousands of girls have become sick because of Gardasil. This is an international problem and I believe that Gardasil will be pulled from the market as was VIOXX, a former drug that was manufactured by Merck, the maker of Gardasil.

Because so many girls have been injured and maimed by Gardasil, we have built a website at http://WWW.TRUTHABOUTGARDASIL.ORG to consolidate the victim’s stories. I am attaching our latest interviews. I beg of you Kimberly, to cover the side of the injured girls also in response to this story. It is only fair to cover both sides of this story. I can put you into contact with victims across the globe!

Please let me know if you have questions.

Rosemary Mathis

http://WWW.TRUTHABOUTGARDASIL.ORG

Email TRUTHABOUTGARDASIL@CHARTER.NET

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marcia-g-yerman/families-use-social-media_b_443045.html

http://thebulletin.us/articles/2010/01/23/news/nation/doc4b5b52b50fd80963422141.txt

These nuts in offices have to go.