Vote NO on Sarah’s Law - Read Why
Note: Up until last night I was supporting the Vote Yes on Prop 4 campaign until I read what my friend Robyn sent me in an email. Robyn is definitely more of an expert on this subject than I am, and she makes some very thought provoking points about this whole issue and parental rights. Read on…
From Robyn Nordell 9/20/08
Robyn’s Conservative California Election Website www.robynnordell.com
WHY Robyn Nordell
Is OPPOSING Proposition 4 (“Sarah’s Law”)
On the November 2008 Ballot.
Please visit my Prop 4 page www.robynnordell.com/prop_4.aspx to find out HOW and WHY Proposition 4 (“Sarah’s Law”) would inadvertently be so dangerous for overall parental rights and for parents and children in California. ROY HANSON’s Two Excellent Analyses of Prop 4 are posted on my site.
********************
Note From Robyn:
Friends - Most of you know that I am strongly pro-life and have worked for more than twenty years on behalf of life issues, parental rights, religious freedoms, traditional values, and other conservative causes. I am saddened to say, that although Prop 4 is well-intentioned and supported by some very good people, the unintended NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES of putting the language of Prop 4 into the state constitution would vastly outweigh the sought-after benefits.
Prop 4 has the potential of causing great long-term harm to overall parental rights in California (outside of the area of abortion) and causing innocent parents to become much more susceptible to false allegations of abuse or neglect.
With so many examples of judicial activism and a growing bias against Judeo-Christian values and the traditional family, I believe that it would be foolish for conservatives to give activist judges and liberal child-rights activists the tools, inadvertently provided by Prop 4, to use against good, innocent families in California.
Please take the time to read the excellent analyses of Prop 4, written by Roy Hanson at my request, which explains how and why Prop 4 would be so dangerous to overall parental rights and for good, innocent parents and children in California.
Hanson’s PRIMARY Concern with Prop 4 www.robynnordell.com/prop_4.aspx#primaryconcern
Hanson’s Excellent Analysis of Prop 4 (covers numerous concerns with Prop 4)
www.robynnordell.com/prop_4.aspx#analysis
Respectfully,
Robyn Nordell
P.S. WHO is Roy Hanson? See bottom of email.
********************
The Info Below is found on Robyn’s “Prop 4 Page” www.robynnordell.com/prop_4.aspx and is made available below for your convenience:
ROY HANSON’S – SUMMARY OF PRIMARY CONCERN WITH PROP 4
FULL Article: www.robynnordell.com/prop_4.aspx#primaryconcern
Roy specifically details HOW and WHY Prop 4 language will be highly likely to bring about bad case law which will hurt parental rights and families in areas outside of the abortion issue.
Excerpts from Hanson’s Primary Concern Paper:
“Prop. 4 can result in very bad case law that will be relied on by other courts, in circumstances other than abortion, eventually creating a very hazardous climate for families, permitting children to circumvent the will of their parents in all kinds of situations.”
“Under Prop. 4, the Appellate Courts will be making their decisions based on Juvenile Court records that are one-sided, containing the child’s point of view. Normally Juvenile Courts allow adversarial due process hearings where parents may testify and be represented by legal counsel, who may cross-examine witnesses, etc., in which cases an Appellate Court would have the record of both sides to consider.”
“These Appellate Court rulings, when published, will result in new case law unrelated to abortion, which becomes increasingly detrimental to parental rights. With perilous new ruling resulting from Prop. 4, blatant judicial activism could further undermine parental authority, by creating dangerously expansive definitions of “emotional abuse” and undermining the traditional nuclear family (father, mother, child) as an autonomous social institution.”
“It may only take one case to produce a very bad ruling that can adversely affect the whole state.”
**********
ROY HANSON’S EXCELLENT ANALYSIS OF PROP 4 (written at Robyn’s request)
FULL Article: www.robynnordell.com/prop_4.aspx#analysis
Excerpt: “Some have said that this initiative is “a step in the right direction”. We would suggest that this amendment to the Constitution is not just a step. Rather, it is a giant leap – and not in the right direction. Current bad case law precedents would become fixed in constitutional concrete. California would become the first state in America with the constitutional provisions contained in Prop. 4. As a result, a whole new genre of anti-family, anti-parental-rights case law could develop.”
Summary of Concerns Addressed in this Updated Analysis:
1. This initiative gives pro-abortionists constitutionally-guaranteed tools that they could use to circumvent a parent’s right to make decisions in the best interest of their children.
2. This initiative would place the vague and undefined legal terms “severe emotional abuse” and “emotional abuse” into the Constitution for the first time… “Our liberal courts, which are less than family-friendly, can define these new
constitutional terms “severe emotional abuse” and “emotional abuse”…
3. Innocent parents could be more susceptible to false allegations of abuse or neglect.
4. Prop. 4 sets a new standard and principle in the Constitution concerning 1) who is considered “family”, 2) who can be designated to take the place of a parent, and 3) under what conditions. Just because courts have already ruled in this direction, and California and some other states have parts of Prop. 4’s language in their state law does not make it right or wise to place this wording in our Constitution.
5. This Constitutional Amendment initiative contains details, which in and of themselves are inappropriate to place in a constitution.
6. This constitutional amendment places dangerous wording in the California Constitution, which could be used as the basis to argue that parental rights can be diminished in other areas of the lives of minor children. This dangerous wording could be persuasive in further undermining parental authority and the nuclear family (father, mother, child) as an autonomous social institution.
**********
From Robyn
Here’s ONE key example of why Sarah’s Law is so dangerous:
Currently the phrase “severe emotional abuse” is not in the definition of child abuse or in the state constitution. Prop 4 adds this undefined term to the state constitution and creates the following dangerous scenario:
On the basis of a pregnant girl making an UNVERIFIED claim to an abortionist that her parent has “severely emotionally abused” her, the following would happen:
The abortionist would file a child abuse report against the parent
(The parent could be totally innocent.)
The UNVERIFIED child abuse report would be put into the girl’s medical records
The girl would choose an “adult family member” to be notified in place of the parent
(Do not underestimate the significance of this – We would be placing wording into the state constitution that says that adult family members can be notified in place of parents)
The girl can still obtain the abortion within 48 hours.
Roy Hanson’s Background:
As many of you know, Roy Hanson of Child and Family Protection Association has twenty-plus years of experience in effectively helping to protect parental rights in California. I have known Roy for two decades, have worked with him on many projects, and have found him to be a consistently excellent source of information on parental rights issues.
Roy has a MSSW - Masters of Science in Social Work, with a specialty in Public Policy from the University of Texas at Austin. He taught social work for four years at the university from which he obtained his Masters. He also double majored in Psychology and Sociology at Baylor University. He knows how social workers think, understands the CPS system, and how good, innocent parents can get caught up in the Child Protective Services and Juvenile Court System.
About Robyn Nordell http://robynnordell.com/about_robyn.aspx
