State must provide guidance to protect the defenseless
In response to the “unsigned editorial,” “It’s not up to legislators to dictate care,” published on April 2, 2022, I agree wholeheartedly that medical decisions should be determined between patients and their doctors. Unfortunately, the editorial has mis-identified “who,” is the patient. The “state” has the role of the ultimate protector of the defenseless and there are multiple examples of how state laws protect the young and the elderly alike and are the very basis for which “child protective services,” and “adult protective services,” exist.
In the case of termination of a pregnancy, the “patient” is the unborn fetus who, by the 15th week of development, has a completely distinct circulatory system with its own beating heart and a genetic profile different from the mother. In only 5 weeks later, at 20 weeks of development, such infants who deliver prematurely are able to survive, with intensive neonatal care, outside of the mother’s womb and lead completely normal lives. The state therefore has a vested interest in protecting the life of the child (the patient) within the womb just as well as the neonate who is in the intensive care unit.
In the case of gender re-assignment surgery, the ability for a minor to make such a life affecting and irreversible decision is metered in the same terms of contract law, liquor laws, and tobacco purchases. These laws have been enacted to protect the lives of youth who may not be able to fully understand the ramifications of the issues in such matters. Parents are not given any opportunity to excuse their children from such state statutes or give their children “parental permission.” In each of the above examples, once an individual reaches their 18th birthday, they are now empowered to decide for themselves.
I applaud the Arizona state legislature for having the integrity to provide guidance that protects the defenseless from those who seek to profit from choices that one might someday come to regret.
RON CLARK, MD
Yuma