Can a Minor Be Forced to Have an Abortion

I believe there's a valid argument to be made that perhaps the pregnant 13 year old would be safer in foster care.

Somebody didn't do their parenting too well.

I agree there is that issue needing investigation also.

Quote:

---

Quoting Dogmatique

---

I believe there's a valid argument to be made that perhaps the pregnant 13 year old would be safer in foster care.

Somebody didn't do their parenting too well.

---

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

Again, I disagree. I think that such a tactic would seriously put the parents at risk. I think that the likelihood would be that CPS would remove BOTH children from their care.

---

It's not a "tactic". It's what's GOING to happen. CPS IS going to be involved due to the fact that the 13 year old is pregnant. Yes, the teen and her baby may be removed. Unless the parents of the minor have a time machine to go back and stop her from getting pregnant, there's no real "course" of action for them to take here. The powers that be will be the ones really deciding what happens with this family going forward, with both the mother and the baby. The only real decision they can make at THIS point is whether or not to provide for the baby if the baby is left there, or to not care for the baby and turn it over to the state (and that's only IF children's services gives them that option).

Quote:

---

Quoting aardvarc

---

It's not a "tactic". It's what's GOING to happen. CPS IS going to be involved due to the fact that the 13 year old is pregnant. Yes, the teen and her baby may be removed. Unless the parents of the minor have a time machine to go back and stop her from getting pregnant, there's no real "course" of action for them to take here. The powers that be will be the ones really deciding what happens with this family going forward, with both the mother and the baby. The only real decision they can make at THIS point is whether or not to provide for the baby if the baby is left there, or to not care for the baby and turn it over to the state (and that's only IF children's services gives them that option).

---

Please don't misunderstand me...but the way that you have come off in this thread is that if the parents do not want the child in their home, or don't want their 13 year old to be a parent, that they can, without impunity, simply refuse to provide for the child and then call CPS when the child doesn't have what he/she needs...and that is incredibly dangerous advice. The parents do not have the option to simply refuse to provide for the child and "turn it over to the state". They don't have that option...unless they are willing to put themselves at serious risk.

Putting the state on notice they refuse to provide for a child that is not their own is not dangerous. At worst it will result in removal of their child into foster care. That would be no more expensive and certainly less hassle than the current one.

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

Please don't misunderstand me...but the way that you have come off in this thread is that if the parents do not want the child in their home, or don't want their 13 year old to be a parent, that they can, without impunity, simply refuse to provide for the child and then call CPS when the child doesn't have what he/she needs...and that is incredibly dangerous advice. The parents do not have the option to simply refuse to provide for the child and "turn it over to the state". They don't have that option...unless they are willing to put themselves at serious risk.

---

If the grandparents don't want to raise the child of their 13 year old, they have MULTIPLE avenues of not doing so. That's the legal reality. They absolutely CAN decide not to lift a finger to support or aid in raising the child or spend a dime on their grandchild. So long as they appropriately notify authorities that the child's parent is UNABLE or willing to provide for the child, then the child gets taken by the state and placed with persons who ARE willing and able to care for the child. No skin of the grandparent's noses at all, NO risk to themselves since they have no LEGAL obligation to the child. In no way am I advocating that they sit back on their hands until the kid's ribs are showing then call CPS to take the baby. Mearly stating, as Dis pointed out, that legal reality is that the baby isn't THEIRS and that if they don't want to be helpful in raising the baby, they have no legal obligation to do so. They can assume that at least the baby, if not mother AND baby, will be taken by the state - and even then, there's every possibility that such a removal might be in the BEST interst of teen mom and her baby. Again, I didn't give advice on what they SHOULD do - what they SHOULD do is lavish the child with love and puppies. But those who have the compulsion to ask questions about if they HAVE TO take care of a baby probably SHOULDN'T be taking care of a baby.

It is also true that, while we do not know the circumstances under which a 13 year old got pregnant, IF the parenting, or lack thereof, of the 13 year old in any way contributed to it, Child Services SHOULD know about it.