Democritus,
The whole point is that the child should not have the right of confidentiality. The State has passed privacy laws that enable the child to legally avoid the responsibility for their actions. We should not put medicos in that position. If the child has not the confidence to talk, about her being sexually active, with her parents she is hardly mature enough to make decissions regarding her sexual activities.

Whether anyone likes it or not, parents are responsible for the childs well being until they are 18. How much freedom, responsibility and privacy children get is determined by the parent. Most parents give kids more slack, and privacy, as they show compedentcy and responsibility. When kids fall short, the reins are tightend a bit.

After years of parents teaching kids about honesty, integrity and owning up when one does something wrong, we have government saying 'Hey, you do not have to be answerable for you actions, its fine to deceive your parents, to lie, to cover up. Your mum and dad don't have to know what you do. Privacy laws give you the means to stop your parents from finding out. If you can get away with something you should do so'.

Governments lie, cover up and not disclose, all the time. They are experts at it.

Is that the message we want to give to the children.

Parents should not simply wash their hands of one very important aspect of their childs growing up by saying it is the kids private business and we will butt out, we don't want to know what they get up to. This is what some have been saying on this thread and that is frightening.

Banjo, there’s a lot to agree with you in your last post. I think it clarifies your position beyond the confusion accidentally caused by your FGM clunker. Thanks for distinguishing state and federal responsibility for me after my Kevin rave. Kevin was more of a metaphor. I am well aware that we all interpret Kevin differently so take it as you wish. Besides, we in NSW have no state leader worthy of respect, so try to understand my exaggerated love for Kevin.

Banjo, I see what you're trying to get at. It was a bit obscured by all sorts of side issues.

As it happens, I disagree with you, though. My responsibility is to ensure that my kids have a set of values that allows them to make informed decisions when they feel moved to do so and to be available to them for advice if they need it.

I do not and cannot have the responsibility to make all of their decisions for them once they demonstrate an ability to do so for themselves, whether I agree with their choices or not. I don't much like the state acting on my childrens' behalf without informing me, but I also doubt that my children would place me in that position, as we have a strong relationship that allows them to raise the sorts of issues that might lead to the situation under discussion.

As has been said, the nurse and doctor (and possibly, school counsellor) must have had reasons for not informing the parents, and those reasons probably include the girl's inability to talk openly with her parents or an anticipation of punishment. It may have even been a wish to protect the parents from knowledge that may be hurtful to them. I disagree that this lack of communication is necessarily anything to do with the girl's maturity. I know people in their forties who can't tell their parents about aspects of their private lives; even spouses get kept in the dark. We know little about the case, and it seems there are a lot of assumptions being made.

In general, you see the rights of the parents outweighing the rights of the child, based on parental responsibility. If the child takes the responsibility on for herself, what then?

Banjo,

The very reason that a person has the right of confidentiality is so they can seek medical help with no fear of repercussions.

What if the parents were actually part of the problem.

You don't own your children, you only have a right of care and custody. Their rights override any of yours.

Banjo

*The whole point is that the child should not have the right of confidentiality. The State has passed privacy laws that enable the child to legally avoid the responsibility for their actions. We should not put medicos in that position. If the child has not the confidence to talk, about her being sexually active, with her parents she is hardly mature enough to make decissions regarding her sexual activities.*

Banjo
You are one hundred percent on the money.
Children do not make adult choices - thats what parents are for.

The huge funds given to Citz Right from Saudi and policy promises is what led us to this.

To lower the age of consent and bring us in line with other countries who approve of children having sex and babbies.

Next we will have the legal age of marriage lowered to 14 as well.
Its all quite political and made on a promise pre elections and before.

Its good to see someone with a few morals.

I was going to say I am shocked at first but then again- I guess I shouldn be.

Your Children are one of the lucky ones to have some proper parents.

The only thing you have to do now is to hope they meet partners of the same background.

Welcome to the New Australia - Its frighting.
It was already lowered from 18 to 16- guess they werent happy with that.

Take a good look behind all policys and you will always find a political reason- but not neccessarily a moral one.

Good Luck Banjo I take my hat off to you+ anybody else bring their kids up with some morals.

Pity about the Governments lack of morals.

Boy I wonder how much that mob donated.

I've been following this thread with interest and assessing the arguments everyone put forward. Concerning the posters who have engaged here I think its impossible to say to any group "Yep. You are the mob who is right." Because the one thing that is constant for each camp is that you are being true to what you believe in - and so, whichever way you come down on this question, you are obviously teaching your kids what your firmly believe to be truth and honour.

However, there are not just hundreds, but thousands of families out there with whom many of you do not come into contact who do not have the privilege of having had firm moral guidelines, educated (either formal or informal) assessments or even adequate knowledge in order to arrive at such conclusions.

I think some people are reading about this problem and transposing it into their own world of experience wherein it's relatively easy to take a moral stance.

However,lets all keep in mind that there are different layers of society and different world and societal views. For everyone who has said they have approached parenthood with certain ideals, stances, and agenda - whether that be to take full responsibility until age 18, to allow incremental freedoms until age 18, or to butt out completely - there are familial groups out there who have never given any consideration whatsoever to the rights of anyone other than themselves. Who would find the entire concept of responsible parenting alien. For them life happens; kids happen; and the results are random.

Whatever your views on parenthood, at least you see it as as a responsibility - perhaps this young girl, and thousands like her - are products of families that believe differently.

In such a case the state needs to intervene and we, no matter in whatever way we have chosen to bring up our kids, continue to do so knowing that, if we have been true to our ideals, such cases do not impact on us?