"Whose child is she anyway?" was the headline screaming from the cover of the Daily Mail above the story of 14-year-old Michelle Smith who had an abortion without her mother’s knowledge. Children and young people are not property, and parents do not have ownership rights over them. But there is an irony in this case which Maureen Smith, Michelle’s mother, was quick to point out. While young teenagers can seek and get confidential sexual advice services, and treatment, with no requirement for doctors or other health staff to include their parents in the discussion, parents can be prosecuted if these same children skip school. Parents have now also been squarely blamed by a head teachers’ leader for everything from obesity to youth crime.
But parental responsibility surely has to cut both ways - either teenagers are to be recognised as people capable of taking responsibility for their own decisions, or parents should be included when far-reaching issues such as pregnancy are being discussed. The suspicion here is that the government would prefer pregnant teenagers to get their advice and support from professionals than from their parents. In many cases, this may be in the young person’s best interests, but the government should not be surprised that parents feel confused about what is expected of them.
It has been reported that the Children Bill is to be amended to acknowledge and even define the role of parents. This will be a controversial and delicate task, but at least should stimulate a much needed debate about what a parent’s job really is.
