Minerva GarciaSWRK 525: 7-9:50 p.m.Assignment 2: Policy Analysis10-26-06A. The idea behind proposition 85 is to require a physician to notify a minor’s parents or legal guardian within a 48 hour period prior to performing an abortion involving that minor. This policy affects “unemancipated” minors who are under 18 years old, have not entered a valid marriage, are not on active duty in armed services of the United States, and have not been declared free from her parents’ or guardians’ custody and control underthe state law. Physicians will contact the minor’s parent or legal guardian either through personal written notification or mail notification. There are certain exceptions such as medical emergencies, waivers approved by parent or guardian, and waivers approved by courts. The proposition’s concept is to diminish the rights of a female to have an abortion.Although supporters of the propositions can argue that they are looking out for the minor’s safety and feel minors do not have the capability to make such a decision on theirown without the support of the parent or guardian. Overall, the policy wants the parent to have a final say by both giving advice to the minor and influencing the minor’s decision since the parent is most likely to discourage the minor to have an abortion. (California General Election Official Voter Guide) (California Catholic). B. Roe vs. Wade is the historical landmark of this proposition. In 1973 the Supreme Court recognized a woman’s constitutional right to have an abortion. In the same year, Doe v. Bolton established that the physician seeing the woman can determine the necessity of conducting an abortion if it is for the well-being of the mother (Ginsberg 2005). After the landmark it was upheld that Medicaid (Med-Cal in California) wouldcovered abortion without restrictions (National Abortion Federation). Then in 1976 Representative Henry Hyde introduced an amendment that limited federal funding for abortion care. The provision became known as the Hyde Amendment which became effective in 1977, it specifies what abortion services are covered under Medicaid. In 1979health exception was excluded, and in 1981 rape and incest exceptions were also excluded from being covered. However, in 1993 Congress rewrote the provision to include Medicaid funding for abortion in cases in where pregnancy resulted from rape or incest. Apart from relying on Federal funds, States are free to use their own funds to cover additional abortion services (National Abortion Federation). In addition, in 1953 a state law allowed minors to get an abortion, without parental consent or notification. In 1987 the Legislature amended this law and required minors to either obtain parental consent or of a court a court prior to getting an abortion, however this law was never implemented. Eventually in 1997 the California Supreme Court rejected it based on the right of privacy. This resulted in minors in various state health care programs to receive the same abortion services as adults (League of Women Voters of ). The evolution that I noticed of proposition 85 in the context of U.S. social welfare policy history in general is how polices are slowly undermining a woman’s constitutional right to abortion. For example, the Hyde amendment specified what abortion services were covered by Medicaid. In 1979 health exceptions was excluded from being covered. Based on the research on the evolution of the policy, policies made after the Roe v. Wadecase have undermined minors by taking away the rights they initially had. In the 1950’s minors received the same abortion services as adults, nowadays exclusions have been onwhat types of abortion services can be covered. If policies like proposition 85 are to pass it will hinder women’s rights. The present development of this policy does reflect current policy trends in U.S. social policy because there is a general concern that this proposition is going to undermine the Roe v. Wade decision. Other concerns this policy reflects are that federal government spends too much money funding abortion services. According to information provided bythe League of Women Voters of California Education Fund, the Medi-cal program is estimated to cost the state 13.8 billion in 2006-07. However, if this policy were to be implemented it would require 350, 000 to develop the forms of implementation as well asincrease state costs for courts (3,4). C. The oppressed populations that are addressed in this policy are low-income minors. According to the Legislative Analyst’s Office the impact proposition 85 would have on the medical costs will discourage some minors from having abortions as well as increase the birthrate in low-income minors. Also, expenses for cash assistance and services to needy families are likely to increase under the California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalsWORKS). If low-income minors need to wait for federal funding to go through and pay for their family planning services they are likely to remain pregnant and go throughout the whole pregnancy due to lack of funds which is controlledby local officials (National Abortion Federation). Also, the legislative Analyst Office states that in studies conducted in other states where similar polices were passed there was a sufficient reduction of abortions; however the data does not include the number of minors that go out of state to get abortions performed. Another problem with data is thatCalifornia does not annually conduct census on abortions. If the policy were to pass it could reduce the amount of abortion, but increase the amount of birthrate of children in low-income families for publicly funded health care that would cost the state more money. Such costs would include medical services provided during pregnancy, deliveries,and follow-up care. The measure would also result in the increase of state costs for the courts due to the provisions that allow the minor to request a court waiver of notification requirements. If minors already are intimidated towards courts then it is less likely for them to seek approval from court. Intimidation will discourage the minor to consider abortion legally in the state. Instead the minor will resort to back alley abortions or go outof state in where they are exposing themselves to more danger. Advocacy strategies that are needed to further improve this policy is to entirely focus on how negatively the oppressed