ARTICLES
JULY/AUGUST 2005 ARTICLES
Contents © 2005
by Jim Holman.
All rights reserved.
Caught With Their Pants Down?
County Hosts Meeting Opposing Parental Notification Initiative
BY MARIA KENNEDY
The Los Angeles Adolescent Health Collaborative is an effort funded by the Los Angeles County Department of Child and Adolescent Health Program. The agency's purported mission is to improve healthcare amongst adolescents; but a May 12 meeting could lead one to believe it may serve another purpose.
At first glance it appears that on May 12, the Los Angeles Adolescent Health Collaborative held a planning session on how to combat the Parents Right to Know Initiative. The initiative, which qualified for the ballot with over a million signatures, will require that abortionists give parents 48 hours notice before their minor daughter can have an abortion. Planned Parenthood of Los Angeles has publicly stated that it will try to stop the measure from going before the voters.
The May 12 planning session, announced through flyers distributed to public schools and other publicly funded agencies, featured the topic, "Parental Consent and Notification of Teen Abortion Law." Although the meeting was purportedly held to discuss the collaborative, one source (requesting anonymity) who attended the session said that it was obvious that "they weren't too interested in the health collaborative."
The flyer, which was posted on a Los Angeles County Department of Health Services website, announced Mary Jane Wagle, the head of Planned Parenthood Los Angeles, as the keynote speaker. Yet my source who attended the meeting said Wagle was not the keynote and instead "sent an underling." The flyer noted that the event was sponsored by the Los Angeles County Child and Adolescent Health Program.
Approximately 30 people attended the session, which was held at the Service Employees International Union's headquarters in the Pico Union district of Los Angeles. My source noted that the attendees were county public employees who "all came to the session during their work hours." The entire session was devoted to the Parents Right to Know initiative. "They said it will show up on the November ballot. This was a political campaign on government time," said my source. One person did ask at the end of the session why there wasn't a representative from Parents Right to Know, but the question was brushed off. My source noted that the organizers of the event were disappointed by the low turnout.
On a question-and-answer-style flyer handed out at the event, Planned Parenthood outlines its opposition to the Parents Right to Know Initiative. One question was, "why does Planned Parenthood oppose the initiative?" The answer: "Planned Parenthood opposes the Parental Notification Initiative ... amending the constitution goes too far. This initiative locks in a permanent, statewide, one size-fits-all-mandate." Further down in the flyer, the question is asked, "why are they changing the state constitution?" The answer: "the California Supreme Court has already ruled that parental notification laws are unconstitutional because they violate young women's right to privacy and threaten their health. That's why the proponents of the initiative are attempting to amend the constitution — it's their last chance to enforce a law like this in California." This information is erroneous. In 1997 the California supreme court struck down a parental consent law, not a parental notification law. Currently there is no parental notification law in California.
The flyer goes on to list the groups that are opposing the Parents Right to Know Initiative. "Who opposes this initiative?" The answer: "Along with Planned Parenthood, NARAL Pro-Choice California and the ACLU, many other medical and civil rights organizations have come out in opposition to parental notification laws. The American Medical Association, the American Academy of Family Physicians, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and many others have cited the risk to teens' health in opposing these laws. According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, 'mandating parental notification does not achieve the intended benefit of promoting family communication but it does increase the risk of harm to the adolescent by delaying access to the appropriate care.'"
The source at the meeting said that there seemed to be two women in charge. "One was named Diane, and I didn't get the other one's name. They wanted to have more meetings but said the response was pretty bad."
Since the session was held, and the flyers were handed out, under the auspices of the county of Los Angeles, on May 13, I contacted Tony Bell, communications director for Los Angeles County supervisor Michael Antonovich. Within an hour of the call to Antonovich, the flyer was pulled from the web site.
In a telephone interview with this reporter, Bell said that the agency "was taken to task." "We are not happy about this event either. Obviously there was a political bent to this meeting. Planned Parenthood is very radical. We went to the department head [Dr. Thomas Garthwaite] and told him this was more of a political event. He agreed. They were apologetic about the meeting. They should have known better. Mike is very concerned about this."
Ressie Roman, Antonovich's staffer for health issues, concurred. "There should not have been a county agency hosting this meeting. They need to be careful; public health is a controversial topic. I told them they have five bosses they have to consult with before they do these things."
John Schunhoff, chief of operations for the Los Angeles County health department, told me in a June 7 telephone interview that the Los Angeles County Adolescent Health Collaborative had been mislead by Planned Parenthood. "They schedule various meetings on health topics. At the time the issue [parental notification] was proposed, the initiative had not qualified. Staff thought they were scheduling an informative meeting, and what happened is Planned Parenthood gave a very one-sided presentation. Staff had asked for a copy of the handout, but Planned Parenthood didn't provide a copy until it was passed out at the meeting."
When this reporter noted that the Parents Right to Know proponents turned in over a million signatures by April 14, which would cause a reasonable person to think it would qualify, Schunhoff agreed that it had been a mistake. "This event turned out to be very one-sided. Staff has been told to be careful in the future." When asked if the Parents Right to Know proponents would be given equal time at future Los Angeles County Adolescent Health Collaborative meetings, Schunhoff replied, "if they want to make a presentation, they'll be welcomed. We are now focusing on preventing this from happening again."
The flyer lists Laura Lathrop-Warriner as the contact for the meeting. Repeated calls to the number listed on the flyer received no response.