UPDATED
I really really dislike the New Zealand media some days and today is certainly one of them. I walked into work this morning and the first thing I saw was this article staring at me from the front page.
The Hand Mirror has a great post about the article, pointing out the lengths to which it misrepresents the law.
The fact is, school-age women should have the right (which they do), to have access to abortions and to advice, support and guidance around abortions and other aspects of reproductive health, without being forced to tell their parents. This is especially important considering the fact that New Zealand sex ed is not anywhere near as comprehensive enough to actually ensure a safe level of knowledge of sexual health issues in the general public. In a society where talking about sex in a constructive way is often taboo, especially between parents and children, we cannot expect young women to figure out all of this stuff on their own, then turn around and tell them they need parental consent in order to make a decision about their own bodies.
However, as far as I can see, none of this is actually up for debate. None of the information in the article was new, even the story sounded like every other story on parental consent laws. The article doesn't actually talk about the law, or a proposed change to the law. I almost cannot see the point of it. Of course, the point of it is to sensationalise an issue which has been widely accepted in New Zealand for a long time.
This is simply yet another attempt by the media to whip up a frenzy of enraged morality police, the sort who hate 'parents being told how to raise their children' (i.e. not abusing them), but have no qualms telling women, especially young women what to do with their bodies; whether it be what to wear, what to drink or when to have children.
I say again, with feeling: ARGH.
I really really dislike the New Zealand media some days and today is certainly one of them. I walked into work this morning and the first thing I saw was this article staring at me from the front page.
The Hand Mirror has a great post about the article, pointing out the lengths to which it misrepresents the law.
The fact is, school-age women should have the right (which they do), to have access to abortions and to advice, support and guidance around abortions and other aspects of reproductive health, without being forced to tell their parents. This is especially important considering the fact that New Zealand sex ed is not anywhere near as comprehensive enough to actually ensure a safe level of knowledge of sexual health issues in the general public. In a society where talking about sex in a constructive way is often taboo, especially between parents and children, we cannot expect young women to figure out all of this stuff on their own, then turn around and tell them they need parental consent in order to make a decision about their own bodies.
However, as far as I can see, none of this is actually up for debate. None of the information in the article was new, even the story sounded like every other story on parental consent laws. The article doesn't actually talk about the law, or a proposed change to the law. I almost cannot see the point of it. Of course, the point of it is to sensationalise an issue which has been widely accepted in New Zealand for a long time.
This is simply yet another attempt by the media to whip up a frenzy of enraged morality police, the sort who hate 'parents being told how to raise their children' (i.e. not abusing them), but have no qualms telling women, especially young women what to do with their bodies; whether it be what to wear, what to drink or when to have children.
I say again, with feeling: ARGH.
No comments:
Post a Comment