For this blog post, I thought it might be interesting to give a bit more background on the Responsible Counseling efforts that NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts is working on, particularly since some of you participated in a survey on the subject last week. Senator Katherine Clark sponsored the Bill, An Act relative to responsible counseling (S.999) in January of 2013. After being reviewed by the Joint Committee on Public Health by both the House and the Senate, the Senate attached it to a study order (S.2114) to the Senate Committee on Ethics and Rules[1]. This study order had a number of other Bills attached to it, including a Bill on dental restoration, latex glove use and tobacco cessation, to name a few. According to the text of S.2114, the Study order states: “That the committee on Public Health be authorized and directed to make an investigation and study of certain current Senate documents.”[2]
NARAL is becoming involved in this study, as part of the reason for gaining this information from the public via survey is so that it might be used for hearings on the topic at a later time. NARAL plans to survey individuals who have worked with minors in the past, such as attorneys, school nurses, and guidance counselors in addition to conducting this survey with the public. In doing so, they hope to gather support for the expansion of consent laws.
I wanted to take a look at the framing of the issue that NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts uses in their Fact Sheet, which can be found here: http://www.prochoicemass.org/assets/bin/pdfs/2013Responsible%20counseling%20fact%20sheet%20FINAL.pdf
The organization presents a very clear message in the Fact Sheet: This current law is not protecting minors, it is harming them. This emotional appeal, which is presented in bold throughout the Fact Sheet, is then supported by evidence from the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics, as well as statistical evidence on the rate of approval from the Superior Court judges involved in judicial bypass (100%) and the increased rate of minors seeking out of state care since the consent laws were adopted (300%).
The organization avoids presenting testimonials or statistics from clinics or providers- notice there is nothing from Planned Parenthood or any other Pro-Choice organization listed on the Fact Sheet. I would argue that the organization is attempting to reframe the discussion around consent and counseling within a pediatric health frame, something that would appeal to most. In addition to this reframing, the organization presents a vague but relatively “safe” solution to the issue of expanding consent laws in Massachusetts. The law would include family members or “trained medical professionals”, which would appeal to my sample according to the survey I conducted.
I noticed in the survey that many people were more comfortable with the concept of a family member providing consent than with a school counselor. One individual I surveyed, however, expressed skepticism in the ability of her family in particular to make an informed, unbiased decision on the topic. She would trust a school counselor who could be trained in the topic more than a family member. It would be interesting to gain more information about the socio-demographic background of the sample, to determine if religion, culture, or other factors may inform their responses. We will be updating the survey with additional questions and would be happy to receive suggestions from the class, as well.
[1] https://malegislature.gov/Bills/188/Senate/S999
[2] https://malegislature.gov/Bills/188/Senate/S2114/History