L.G. had run away at least five times from her youth shelter, maintained, "It would make no sense to have the baby."
"I don't think I should have the baby because I'm 13, I'm in a shelter and I can't get a job ... DCF would take the baby anyway,"
This whole scenario does not make any sense to me. You have a state law saying parents/guardians do not have to consent to a minor having an abortion. Children and Family services has a rule that conflicts with that law and the judge that says, "duh, I don't know," on what would seem to be a no-brainer.
I'm not a lawyer, but it would seem that CFS rules could be not be enforced when in conflict with state laws, just as you couldn't enforce state laws that conflict with federal laws. And why the hell someone would want to force this kid to have a baby which would immediately be taken into state custody anyway is something I have big issues with. I fail to see how making this girl take the child to term under any circumstances could possibly be in her best interests that the state, as her guardian, is supposed to be upholding.
Let the girl have the abortion and let the courts sort it out for the next ten years or so. They don't need another ward of the state to put a human face on their legal posturing. That is child abuse.
(Edited by katdaddy on 5/01, 5:26am)