To the Editor:

In response to Janet Byrne Smith.

First, I agree that signing the petition does not change anything in law. It allows the proposed constitutional amendment to go on the ballot in November. But why would you sign something you find abhorrent?

The proposed constitutional amendment states that “Every individual has a right to make and carry out one’s own reproductive decisions.” “Every individual” does not specify any age requirement. A 12-year-old girl wanting an abortion has the right to her own “reproductive decisions” without interference (or notification to parents) from governmental agencies, such as schools or medical professionals. Even the abortion facility would not be permitted to notify the parents of the surgery being performed on their daughter. The notification would be classified as interference in her “reproductive decision.” Likewise, a preteen boy could decide to “become” a girl, leading to permanent maiming, and his parents would be unaware.

The petition does not fully define “reproductive decisions.” These decisions can include sex change surgery, which would affect reproductive possibilities. Again, without any age specification, any person can ask for a sex change surgery. Again, there would be a mandate that no one interfere with this decision, no matter the age of the individual.

I agree, concerning “parental consent,” the proposed law does not change existing law, IT OVERRIDES IT! If school/medical/other professionals are forbidden to communicate with parents concerning the “reproductive decisions” (abortion, sex change) made by “individuals” (including minor children), then “parental consent” becomes a charming, old-fashioned term and no longer provides protection for Ohio’s children.

What is included in the phrase “reproductive decisions, including but not limited to?” What might be added as our society and culture change? The law should state exactly what is proposed to be protected.

The proposed constitutional amendment is written very loosely, which will allow more possibilities than have been included in this short response. This proposal mandates that each person, at any age, be able to make life-changing decisions without input from parents, medical professionals or mental health professionals. Why should our constitution refuse such input when the decision is un-reversible?

Therefore, decline to sign this abhorrent proposal.

Patrick Kent

Utica