If a girl can't consent to sex, can she consent to pregnancy? Childbirth? An abortion?

[drspouse]

So, if a 12 year old can't consent to sex, but thinks she has consented (to make things a bit simpler let's assume the boy is under 16). She gets pregnant.
I understand that most children who become pregnant do not have a termination but instead have the baby and it is raised by her parents.
But if she's not able to consent to sex - because she does not understand the implications - how can she understand the effect on her child's body of a pregnancy?
But again, how can she understand and consent to a termination? Given she'd be unlikely to have competency to consent to other medical procedures?
I'm not sure where the law stands but I guess I'm really asking about actual competency rather than what's legally the case.

I don't think it makes sense to talk about consent to continue a pregnancy.

But as far as making a default of abortion, that is going to result in forced abortions and I suspect that would be a difficult thing to sell to the general public. There are still many people who believe their are significant ethical implications around abortion and forcibly violating those, even in someone young, is not going to go over well, and for that matter might well affect the young persons mental health significantly.

I agree with all of your points, FeministCat, which is actually the point I'm making.

No, I absolutely don't think a 12 year old can possibly understand the full ramifications of pregnancy, childbirth or parenthood. There is no way they can make an informed decision on that. But similarly, there is no way they can make an informed choice on abortion.

There is a risk of coercion either way, from parents who may (or may not) be attempting to act in what they think is their daughter's best interests, but may in fact be pushing her into a decision she regrets. To avoid this, it is imperative that the girl makes a fully informed decision, but we are back to the issue of informed consent./autonomy.....

I'm not sure how this circle can be squared, TBH, my point was really that it is not as simple as saying abortion should be the default, as circumstances will vary.

Sorry, one further thing to say is that a proportion of women do regret their abortion later. The fact that you, or countless others, didn't, doesn't mean that that is the same for everybody. So yes, I do think that abortions should be proceeded with with due caution, to ensure it is indeed the correct decision for those concerned.

And the level of regret can be deep and very distressing. I say this not to judge or persuade anybody against one, as they absolutely are in a lot of cases the right decision. But it does happen.

I find the idea of forcing a 12yo to have an abortion because it's better for her in the long term unsettling. But I'm sure there was a 9yo rape victim somewhere (South America? Asia?) And my initial thoughts there were abortion is best. So I think there is an age where Doctors/parents override the girls own thoughts.

Its a thankfully rare situation in which social workers, counsellors, therapists, the whole raft of child services would be made available, and the whole thing regarded as a major child protection issue. In the same way a child not wanting lifesaving surgery would be supported in understanding what was necessary and helped to prepare for and cope with it. I can't see a child simply being 'forced' into a procedure such as an abortion in that way.

Take a look at the court evidence from the Gard case, or from other court cases where a judge has ruled in best interests of the child against the patient or family's choice; it's done with the best possible effort to support people emotionally and to find consensus and to keep good relationships between patient, family and medical staff. The Gard case was exceptional in that all these usual processes failed.

Spartacus I agree with you that pregnancy, childbirth and parenthood are life changing , absolutely, yes, in the most profound way possible.

But abortion can also be life-changing for some, and it is not helpful to gloss over this, for idealogical (or any other) reason. It's not a cut and dried issue, and we do nobody any favors by cultivating a veil of secrecy around its downsides. Yes, some of the negative feelings that may arise around abortion may be culturally-conditioned, but this does not make them any less real, distressing, and sometimes disabling, to those who suffer them.

Complex issues need to be addressed thoughtfully, rather than swept under the carpet.

But it's an ideological position that abortion is only a convenient return to the status quo with no other significance or meaning. I am having a really hard time seeing how some kind of default policy would be based on what is essentially a belief based position.

I think there’s a difference between consenting to sex and consenting to have a child or a termination.

In the first case she has no legal right to consent to sex. Children don’t have that ‘right’ for their own protection.

In the latter case she has no option but to chose between carrying the child or aborting. She has to consent to one or the other. You can’t deny her the right to both. That’s not just a legal or ethical matter, it’s a point of logic.

Always

I agree, it's applying a criteria in the wrong way. I think the right framework would be to talk about the consent belonging to the parents, which is normal for children who don't have the capacity to make a medical decision. Even where 12 year olds are seen as legally unable to make the decision about medical care, I think in most cases it's considered appropriate for children of that age to have a voice in their medical care.
Medical consent really only devolves to the state under unusual conditions. I don't see why it would be different here.