Idaho's Stupid Parental Consent Laws Have Consequences! @@

[wawa]

WHO COULD HAVE GUESSED THAT THIS WOULD HAPPEN???

Gift link:
wapo.st/4hflJjq

regular link: 
www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2024/10/21/idaho-consent-law-teens-health-care/?pwapi_token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJyZWFzb24iOiJnaWZ0IiwibmJmIjoxNzI5NDgzMjAwLCJpc3MiOiJzdWJzY3JpcHRpb25zIiwiZXhwIjoxNzMwODY5MTk5LCJpYXQiOjE3Mjk0ODMyMDAsImp0aSI6ImFhMzFkZmQ3LWZjMWMtNDRiNi1iMTcxLWQ2YTE3N2ZiMGM5YSIsInVybCI6Imh0dHBzOi8vd3d3Lndhc2hpbmd0b25wb3N0LmNvbS9uYXRpb24vMjAyNC8xMC8yMS9pZGFoby1jb25zZW50LWxhdy10ZWVucy1oZWFsdGgtY2FyZS8ifQ.0wSiHeh5Q1Ced_GpJKd4Fb_4vYkM08qmlrDGcOE2BNk

Idaho has a stupid parental consent law designed to torture trans kids and sexually active girls (I mean...protect??  no.  I don't) and you'll all be absolutely shocked to learn that it's had a lot of consequences for providing reasonable medical care.  WaPo focused their story on one particular pregnant 13 year old to really drive it home. 

This piece jumped out at me:

“It has been a terrible bill with terrible outcomes for the youth, especially those who are the victims of their parents’ abuse. I have seen youth not want to participate in therapy for fear their abuser would gain access to what they are talking about,” state Rep. Marco Erickson (R), a youth organization director who voted for the measure despite misgivings, said in an email. “I tried to warn my fellow legislators … but I was one Republican voice among a group of people who do not understand how things work on the ground.”

(my emphasis added)

****RAGEFUL SCREAMING***

[Susie]

I can't make it make sense. 

"[Newborn] was born Sept. 9, a healthy eight pounds. [Teen mom] had been induced the night before, which [Guardian] consented to. [Teen mom] had an epidural, which [Guardian] also consented to."

"At [Newborn]'s two-week checkup with [Doctor] — now the doctor for both mother and child — the new mother gingerly undressed her daughter. A scale showed she was gaining weight well.
[Doctor] asked [Teen mom] a battery of routine questions — about the baby’s behavior, her eating, her sleep schedule. [Teen mom] gave short, quiet answers. [Doctor] also asked [Teen mom] about her own pain and moods, categories of care for which [Guardian]'s consent was required."

This is completely insane.  I mean yes, the mom here is 13, and is still very much a minor herself.  Guardian is assuredly a lifesaver in terms of providing some much needed support and guidance.  But once again for the cheap fucking seats in the back, THIS IS HER OWN BODY.  Give her a damn say.  That goes for everyone.  Pregnant moms, cisgender people, transgender people, and everyone else in the crosshairs of this.  I cannot wrap my head around anything less.

[katfco]

The gift link isn't working for me, but just from what you two have posted I'm already incensed.

[wawa]

Oct 21, 2024 13:32:37 GMT -5 katfco said:

The gift link isn't working for me, but just from what you two have posted I'm already incensed.

wanna be angrier?  

In one, a 17-year-old with a hornet allergy was stung but was unable to get a new epipen from his primary care physician or urgent care because his parents were traveling; by the time he arrived at a hospital, he was in anaphylaxis. In another case, Pyrak said, a 16-year-old was treated at an emergency department for a suicide attempt, but the parents refused to allow follow-up.

The Parental Rights in Medical Decision-Making Act passed on party lines and was signed, with some qualms, by Republican Gov. Brad Little. In a statement, he encouraged monitoring for “unintended barriers” to behavioral health services and noted that conflicting laws might “create confusion” for medical professionals.

THEY KNOW IT'S A BAD LAW AND A DUMB FUCKING IDEA AND THEY DID IT ANYWAY.

[mrspez07]

I have very strong words for these assholes!

However, all of those in favor of this law quoted in the article are for "parental rights", so let's just assume for a second their "good" intentions along the lines of the tenants of those preferences (again, total BS). They are coming at it as an involved, financially and mentally stable parent. None of the legislators that voted in favor of this law seem to have bothered to think about it from the perspective or scenarios of divorced parents, foster care kids, incarcerated parents, incest, or any number of scenarios outside of their privileged perspectives. Fuck them!

[sent]

Not a lawyer, but the situation of the 17 year old sounds like a lawsuit in the making.

ETA - it still may turn into a lawsuit but not necessarily because of this law.

[lilac05]

That is horrid and heartbreaking.

We had almost the opposite situation here in Iowa (of all places) until just recently. From the time kids turned 12, parents could no longer access their medical records via MyChart. There was no way to even get permission to see it. I totally understand for sexual and mental health purposes, but I’d really like to see if my kid’s strep test was positive!

Thankfully they’ve made some changes to it, so it’s better now. Kids’ privacy is still protected (I think), but parents can get the information to help make medical decisions.

[EvieEthelGarland]

And at a youth resource center and shelter for abused and homeless teens in the town of Lewiston, Michelle Lewis’s employees screenshot every call and text they make in attempts to obtain parental consent for distributing tampons or talking with teens about setting goals.

Why TF are tampons considered medical?  What's next, no toilet paper or soap in restrooms? No Kleenex?  We already are at the no bandaids stage. 

I have a teen and while I want to know what is going on with him, I want him to be safe and healthy more. 

[wawa]

Oct 21, 2024 14:28:35 GMT -5 mrspez07 said:

I have very strong words for these assholes!

However, all of those in favor of this law quoted in the article are for "parental rights", so let's just assume for a second their "good" intentions along the lines of the tenants of those preferences (again, total BS). They are coming at it as an involved, financially and mentally stable parent. None of the legislators that voted in favor of this law seem to have bothered to think about it from the perspective or scenarios of divorced parents, foster care kids, incarcerated parents, incest, or any number of scenarios outside of their privileged perspectives. Fuck them!

YEP!!!!  Ditto from the article, for the cheap seats:

Critics say the law — which also grants parents access to minors’ health records, doing away with confidentiality that providers and teen advocates call crucial — ignores the reality that parents aren’t always present or trustworthy.

Like, as if shitty parents, Even RUN OF THE MILL shitty parents, let alone abusive parents, high parents, incarcerated parents don't fucking exist.  jesus H christ on a cracker.

But the guy I quoted in my original post, knows, first hand, up close, that this part is an issue AND HE VOTED FOR IT ANYWAY because he has an R behind his name and when it came down to it, he voted with his damn party.  Because fuck reality, fuck empathy, fuck what you know is right...party above all.  The cruelty of it all is a feature, not a bug.  

[pinkdutchtulips]

This sounds just as backwards as CA's law that allows TWELVE year olds to decide if they wish to take medication or not. Mentally ill 12!! year olds can refuse to take necessary medication to protect themselves AND their families.

NO ONE wants to be in a room w a bipolar 15yo who refuses medication and thinks its ok to assault an adult.

[chickadee77]

Oct 21, 2024 14:28:35 GMT -5 mrspez07 said:

I have very strong words for these assholes!

However, all of those in favor of this law quoted in the article are for "parental rights", so let's just assume for a second their "good" intentions along the lines of the tenants of those preferences (again, total BS). They are coming at it as an involved, financially and mentally stable parent. None of the legislators that voted in favor of this law seem to have bothered to think about it from the perspective or scenarios of divorced parents, foster care kids, incarcerated parents, incest, or any number of scenarios outside of their privileged perspectives. Fuck them!

So, I grew up in a super conservative home. My family are still there, politically. I am not.

I think there are a faction of those folks that are just so fucking clueless and blindly optimistic (and PRIVILEGED, make no mistake). Of COURSE parents all love their kids and are involved in their lives for the greater good. Of COURSE churches and corporations will help those struggling financially. And on and on.

@@@@@@ and TW pregnancy loss

It was a wild thing - I had a late m/c and then a TFMR prior to my first. My sister came to help out aftrr my elder child was born and, not knowing about my TFMR was holding my baby and said, "How on earth could someone have an abortion knowing this?" And I replied, "How on earth could someone force someone else to go through this against their will?"

I have no patience for these fools, because they don't understand what the world is like outside of their pretty little heads.

/end rant

[UMaineTeach]

They don’t care who dies. They give no fucks about consequences.

[wanderingback]

Oct 21, 2024 14:37:12 GMT -5 sent said:

Not a lawyer, but the situation of the 17 year old sounds like a lawsuit in the making.

The gift link isn’t working for me and Google isn’t helping. But even in my liberal state anyone under 18 has to have parental consent for treatment/prescriptions unless it’s a medical emergency. It sounds like the 17 year old tried to get an appointment and prescription with their pcp. I think in most states that wouldn’t be allowed.

I wonder what Idaho’s law was previously, Google wasn’t helping much. It’s maddening that minors don’t have some protections and autonomy.

[sent]

Oct 21, 2024 21:23:52 GMT -5 wanderingback said:

Oct 21, 2024 14:37:12 GMT -5 sent said:

Not a lawyer, but the situation of the 17 year old sounds like a lawsuit in the making.

The gift link isn’t working for me and Google isn’t helping. But even in my liberal state anyone under 18 has to have parental consent for treatment/prescriptions unless it’s a medical emergency. It sounds like the 17 year old tried to get an appointment and prescription with their pcp. I think in most states that wouldn’t be allowed.

I wonder what Idaho’s law was previously, Google wasn’t helping much. It’s maddening that minors don’t have some protections and autonomy.

I assumed this storied implied that the law required the parents had to consent in person. I was able to pull up the article and it gives examples of phone consent being allowed. 

[Beeps (WOT?*)]

I"ve already let it be known that if my son's daughter needs care she can come visit me. She's 10 miles into ID. Or my son or his wife will take her to a WA hospital. Her mom won't since she's (words deleted plus anti-vaxxer and stupid.) I should talk to him about medical care authorization since they already fight about COVID vaccinations.
My daughter and granddaughter moved to Boise three days ago (from Jacksonville, FL so it's not like it was a *worse* move re: political climates.) So recent they're still in a hotel waiting for their house to close. I wonder if they have time to move again since the new house hasn't closed yet.

chickadee77 I don't want to quote but wanted to say something to let you know how sorry I am. I've heard it from someone who stands at PP with the rosaries and billboards, with the "I've had kids and can't imagine having to..." and have had to rebut with "I've also had children and I can." because I have had to make that decision, tyvm.

[wanderingback]

Oct 21, 2024 21:56:19 GMT -5 sent said:

Oct 21, 2024 21:23:52 GMT -5 wanderingback said:

The gift link isn’t working for me and Google isn’t helping. But even in my liberal state anyone under 18 has to have parental consent for treatment/prescriptions unless it’s a medical emergency. It sounds like the 17 year old tried to get an appointment and prescription with their pcp. I think in most states that wouldn’t be allowed.

I wonder what Idaho’s law was previously, Google wasn’t helping much. It’s maddening that minors don’t have some protections and autonomy.

I assumed this storied implied that the law required the parents had to consent in person. I was able to pull up the article and it gives examples of phone consent being allowed. 

So the 17 year old had phone consent at the pcp’s office and they wouldn’t allow it?

[Beeps (WOT?*)]

Reading the article I call absolute BS on this: "Speaking for the bill, a mother tearfully described how her family had been “severely affected” by school policies that kept confidential her child’s counseling about gender identity. She testified that the teen had been prescribed testosterone without her permission."

That parent is an absolute shill and liar. SCHOOLS don't counsel on gender identity nor do they prescribe hormone treatments. This is just like the "schools keep catboxes for kids who identify as animals to go to the bathroom in class."

[sent]

Oct 21, 2024 22:51:37 GMT -5 wanderingback said:

Oct 21, 2024 21:56:19 GMT -5 sent said:

I assumed this storied implied that the law required the parents had to consent in person. I was able to pull up the article and it gives examples of phone consent being allowed. 

So the 17 year old had phone consent at the pcp’s office and they wouldn’t allow it?

No, they couldn't contact the parents for 6 hours so they didn't allow it. Phone consent is allowed but they didn't have it in the boy's case which is what you were saying is the norm. I mistakenly thought phone contact was not allowed and that consent had to be in-person. 

[basilosaurus]

The interactive post roe posted a few days ago had a case of a 9 year old pregnant girl who needed to be flown to another state.

I read about it in public and very visibly cried. I'm not ashamed. This is horrific. If anyone had asked if I'm OK, no, I'm not. We're not.

[wanderingback]

Oct 22, 2024 3:54:06 GMT -5 sent said:

Oct 21, 2024 22:51:37 GMT -5 wanderingback said:

So the 17 year old had phone consent at the pcp’s office and they wouldn’t allow it?

No, they couldn't contact the parents for 6 hours so they didn't allow it. Phone consent is allowed but they didn't have it in the boy's case which is what you were saying is the norm. I mistakenly thought phone contact was not allowed and that consent had to be in-person. 

Ahh ok got it. Well then I don’t see how it’s a lawsuit that the doctor’s office followed the law, which is the law in my state as well. But if it was a medical emergency with the kid having an active allergic reaction on site then they should have an emergency kit with an epipen and given it and sent the kid to the ER. But again I can’t read the article It absolutely sounds like this law is bullshit, I was just saying that it is the norm in many other states that you can’t treat minors in non emergency situations for something like giving a rx for an epipen.

In my state we can see and treat for mental health, sexual health and substance use. Or if the child is emancipated, which does include pregnancy/being a parent.

[ellipses84]

I’ve had to deal with the 12 yo MyChart thing but we were able to set it up so I have access.

I’m forever grateful for my Dr when I was 17, who walked me out of the exam room my mother was sitting in, to the bathroom where I was going to do my urine sample, and asked me in private if I was sexually active, then told me to come back and see her later, gave me tons of free birth control samples and got me on a prescription (I think with some other reason in my chart).

People are so ridiculous about schools providing these things. In “liberal California” schools can’t even provide Tylenol or sunscreen to kids without permission and kids can’t even have peanut butter on campus.

[wawa]

if anybody who is also a wapo subscriber could tell me if I'm doing something wrong with the gift link, that'd be swell. I dont use them often, but two people have mentioned it not working in this thread.

[sent]

Oct 22, 2024 8:53:37 GMT -5 wawa said:

if anybody who is also a wapo subscriber could tell me if I'm doing something wrong with the gift link, that'd be swell. I dont use them often, but two people have mentioned it not working in this thread.

I think you have to create a free WaPo account to read free gift link articles. It's come up elsewhere on this board before. I use Safari on a Mac laptop so I usually press "Reader View" quickly in the search bar before the "Login please to read this free article" box appears on the page. This put the whole article in reader view for me to read without creating a log in. Sometimes I can get this to work on my iPhone also. 

[InBetweenDays]

Our high school (part of Seattle Public Schools) has a free on site teen health center that is operated in partnership with Swedish for the last 22 years. It is open to students from any high school or middle school. Some services require parental consent, others (a few are birth control, mental health services if you're over 13, substance abuse services) don't require any parental consent or notification.

We also have a few school locations that offer gender affirming care at centers within the school. Again depending on the services and situation of the teen, they don't always have to get parental consent.

So I wouldn't call all of these stories from these MAGAts BS, but would focus on the fact that having these services available is a GOOD THING!

[sonrisa]

Counseling services without parental notification or using correct names without notification, are drastically different that hormones or hormone blockers.

No one is giving those out without parental consent and a million other hoops to jump through. It is not an easy process even in states where they are available.

[picksthemusic]

Oct 22, 2024 10:28:33 GMT -5 InBetweenDays said:

Our high school (part of Seattle Public Schools) has a free on site teen health center that is operated in partnership with Swedish for the last 22 years. It is open to students from any high school or middle school. Some services require parental consent, others (a few are birth control, mental health services if you're over 13, substance abuse services) don't require any parental consent or notification.

We also have a few school locations that offer gender affirming care at centers within the school. Again depending on the services and situation of the teen, they don't always have to get parental consent.

So I wouldn't call all of these stories from these MAGAts BS, but would focus on the fact that having these services available is a GOOD THING!

We have this kind of thing in SnoCo too - in partnership with Community Health Centers. It's a great thing for the most part, especially in underserved areas where getting into a doctor is hard (or almost impossible in some areas) and getting kids back in school/staying in school is a priority. We are also trying to get local (not national chain) pharmacies to be safety nets for things like catch-up childhood vaccines for kids who are behind but need to get updated to get back in school.

[livinitup]

Oct 21, 2024 22:54:44 GMT -5 Beeps (WOT?*) said:

Reading the article I call absolute BS on this: "Speaking for the bill, a mother tearfully described how her family had been “severely affected” by school policies that kept confidential her child’s counseling about gender identity. She testified that the teen had been prescribed testosterone without her permission."

That parent is an absolute shill and liar. SCHOOLS don't counsel on gender identity nor do they prescribe hormone treatments. This is just like the "schools keep catboxes for kids who identify as animals to go to the bathroom in class."

I know, it hit me, too!
It may be factual to report that the person testified but I call BS that she testified honestly or accurately- report THAT, too. It’s the mind boggling misinformation in articles that infuriates me. These are people who are actively banning books that mention gay people so of course they cry when someone says your kid got “Counseling about gender identity” -> let’s be honest, that probably means a conversation that you won’t go to hell in a guidance counselor’s office. And THAT is offensive to people. The “being prescribed” anything absolutely did NOT happens in the school - the way it is left to imply. She’s either lying or an idiot willfully testifying that she that doesn’t known it was a clinic in/near the school building. Absolutely no one with a license to prescribe medication is being supervised in a non-medical, school building. It is IMPORTANT to get the facts correct in the reporting.

[turkturkleton]

Oct 22, 2024 8:24:15 GMT -5 wanderingback said:

Oct 22, 2024 3:54:06 GMT -5 sent said:

No, they couldn't contact the parents for 6 hours so they didn't allow it. Phone consent is allowed but they didn't have it in the boy's case which is what you were saying is the norm. I mistakenly thought phone contact was not allowed and that consent had to be in-person. 

Ahh ok got it. Well then I don’t see how it’s a lawsuit that the doctor’s office followed the law, which is the law in my state as well. But if it was a medical emergency with the kid having an active allergic reaction on site then they should have an emergency kit with an epipen and given it and sent the kid to the ER. But again I can’t read the article It absolutely sounds like this law is bullshit, I was just saying that it is the norm in many other states that you can’t treat minors in non emergency situations for something like giving a rx for an epipen.

In my state we can see and treat for mental health, sexual health and substance use. Or if the child is emancipated, which does include pregnancy/being a parent.

It isn't a big part of the article, just this:

In one, a 17-year-old with a hornet allergy was stung but was unable to get a new EpiPen from his primary-care physician or urgent care because his parents were traveling; by the time he arrived at a hospital, he was in anaphylaxis.

So he knew he needed an EpiPen to prevent/halt a reaction, but they couldn't give him one without parental consent. It's basically a case of not allowing preventative medicine and instead waiting until something is an emergency to treat it, which is both awful in the short term and can cause much more damage in the long run (which you obviously know!). Without the law in place, he could have administered the EpiPen himself or had it done with his PCP and most likely avoided anaphylaxis altogether.

[Beeps (WOT?*)]

Oct 22, 2024 17:42:27 GMT -5 turkturkleton said:

Oct 22, 2024 8:24:15 GMT -5 wanderingback said:

Ahh ok got it. Well then I don’t see how it’s a lawsuit that the doctor’s office followed the law, which is the law in my state as well. But if it was a medical emergency with the kid having an active allergic reaction on site then they should have an emergency kit with an epipen and given it and sent the kid to the ER. But again I can’t read the article It absolutely sounds like this law is bullshit, I was just saying that it is the norm in many other states that you can’t treat minors in non emergency situations for something like giving a rx for an epipen.

In my state we can see and treat for mental health, sexual health and substance use. Or if the child is emancipated, which does include pregnancy/being a parent.

It isn't a big part of the article, just this:

In one, a 17-year-old with a hornet allergy was stung but was unable to get a new EpiPen from his primary-care physician or urgent care because his parents were traveling; by the time he arrived at a hospital, he was in anaphylaxis.

So he knew he needed an EpiPen to prevent/halt a reaction, but they couldn't give him one without parental consent. It's basically a case of not allowing preventative medicine and instead waiting until something is an emergency to treat it, which is both awful in the short term and can cause much more damage in the long run (which you obviously know!). Without the law in place, he could have administered the EpiPen himself or had it done with his PCP and most likely avoided anaphylaxis altogether.

And not incur a several thousand dollar emergency room bill as a result, too.
Maybe when the parents have to start paying out on this stuff it'll dawn on them that it's terrible legislation.

[Beeps (WOT?*)]

Thought this was timely, having come down my FB feed this afternoon.