I listened to the debates on Proposition 73 at Ventura College, sponsored by Students for Academic Freedom, and was grateful for the opportunity to hear both sides presented.
I disagreed with Christine Lyon of Planned Parenthood, representing the opposition to Proposition 73.

Ms. Lyon stated that a parental notification law was unnecessary in California. She provided no data specific to teen abortions to back up her statement. She referred to a study on decreased teen pregnancy rates in California. This is peripheral and begs the question as to why her organization resists the reliable collection of teen abortion data in California.

What became more and more apparent throughout this debate on parental notification, and pointed out by Ms. Katie Short, co-author of Proposition 73, is the sorry state of available and reliable statistics on abortion in California. Pertinent data on actual numbers related to teen abortions are not available.

So, in addition to the parental notification requirement, one other major benefit of Proposition 73 is the requirement for physicians “to file a form reporting certain information to the state Department of Health Services.” Recognizing and respecting privacy considerations, this physician-filed report would not identify the teen or parent or guardian by name. An annual report, however, compiled by the department, would be available to the public with statistical information related to abortions performed on minors.

Any meaningful future discussion on teen abortion, then, could make use of real numbers and data collected, rather than using unrelated or indirectly related sources.

Our teen daughters are better served and protected in California when parents are notified and when parents and the public have accurate and reliable information sources. Proposition 73 provides for both.

— Mary Dillon, Ventura