NationStates Jolt Archive

Despite the controversy the title alone might cause, this is not an anti-abortion proposal, instead one to make the resolution clearer and establish proper standards for adoption, abortion, and the like.

----

Repeal "Abortion Rights"

A proposal to repeal a previously passed resolution

Category: Repeal

Resolution: #61

Proposed by: Sweatpant Erections

Description: UN Resolution #61: Abortion Rights (Category: Human Rights; Strength: Significant) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: The United Nations,

-DEFINING abortion as the termination of pregnancy by medically-caused death of the fetus

-NOTING that all women have the right to an abortion

-CONCERNED with welfare of all parties involved in an abortion, including the couple, child, and possibly, parents of the couple

-ACKNOWLEDGING religious, ethic, and moral issues involved in abortion

-ACKNOWLEDGING the potential medical complications caused by abortion

-ACKNOWLEDGING the potential problems caused by the introduction of a child into any sort of family, married or otherwise

-NOTING there are other ways to avoid direct parenting of the child, such as adoption

-NOTING that a child can be adopted the moment it is born

-NOTING that United Nations Resolution #61 "Abortion Rights" is too general to outline any sort of controversy erupting from nations against abortion

-NOTING that out of a total 15,917 nations, 6,549 were against (approximately 41% of the UN) the passing of Resolution #61

-REPEALS United Nations Resolution #61 "Abortion Rights," passed June 5th, 2004

-HOPES TO establish a resolution creating clearer abortion rights, as well as setting international standards for abortion as well as adoption, in which the potential parent(s) are given complete information on the benefits and risks of both processes

-DOES NOT SUPPORT an international ban on abortion, or considering abortion murder, instead a system in which the unborn child is given a chance to live, as well as acknowledging the rights of the mother-to-be to make a choice on whether to have an abortion or not

----

[DRAFT]: Replacement Resolution

Resolution Replacement for “Abortion Rights”

Category: Human Rights

Strength: Significant

-DEFINING abortion as a medically-induced miscarriage

-DEFINING adoption as the legal act of placing a child with a parent or parents other than the birth parents

-NOTING that all women have the right to an abortion

-PERMITS abortion in any case, in all member nations

-NOTES that birth as well as abortion is often a dangerous process, and as such, the woman should be informed of the risks of pregnancy, childbirth, abortion, and adoption

-DECLARES that aforementioned information will be issued by the UN in order to avoid the spread of false information

-DECLARES that foster homes and abortion clinics be set up worldwide to accommodate for the demand for both options

-ASKS the UN to provide aid for nations unable to pay for the costs of foster homes and clinics

-DECLARES that international standards must be made for adoption and abortions, outlined below.

ARTICLE I: Standards for Adoption

-1.1- Biological parent or parents have previously consented to placing a child in foster care through previously filed legal documents (specifically, giving up the child, though not necessarily an adoptive family)
-1.2- Adoptive parents have no history of any sort of domestic abuse
-1.3- The biological parent(s) and child have the ability to reunite at any given time, if they wish it.
-1.4- Adoptees have access to their adoption records if they can provide proper proof of identity. However, no other person may access said file.
-1.5- Foster homes must meet proper standards for conduct, outlined below:

-2.1- Receive a clean inspection annually.
-2.2- Employees have no history of domestic abuse
-2.3- Make a clear attempt to provide either a temporary or permanent living situation for the adoptee.
-2.3- Children are kept in a safe, secure environment and monitored properly for any sort of drug use or other illegal activities
-2.4- For children unable to function properly in foster homes, residential treatment facilities are available, which meet the above standards, but also include psychologists in order to prepare the child for return to foster care/their biological parents.

-1.6- If the adoptive parents are dissatisfied with their adoptee, counseling be given to them, or otherwise, the option to return the adoptee to a foster home.
-1.7- Social workers must be provided for each foster family.
-1.8- Child welfare agencies must identify cases where circumstances make reunion with the biological parents impossible and set said cases up for a foster family as soon as possible.
-1.9- Social workers meet the following standards:

-3.1- Have no history of domestic abuse
-3.2- Have proper training in fields involved in their work, such as child psychology
-3.3- Monitor the family on a monthly basis, or as requested by either foster parent or adoptee

ARTICLE II: Standards for Abortion

-1.1- Abortion requires consent from the pregnant woman.
-1.2- Abortion is done privately, and records are never revealed in any case, unless the woman chooses otherwise.
-1.3- The abortion must be performed by a certified doctor.
-1.4- Abortion clinics are treated as hospitals, and therefore must be kept clean and orderly.

Do you have a text for the replacement resolution?

Id like to state that we are against the repeal.

I'm concerned that this

-HOPES TO establish a resolution creating clearer abortion rights, as well as setting international standards for abortion as well as adoption, in which the potential parent(s) are given complete information on the benefits and risks of both processes

-DOES NOT SUPPORT an international ban on abortion, or considering abortion murder, instead a system in which the unborn child is given a chance to live, as well as acknowledging the rights of the mother-to-be to make a choice on whether to have an abortion or not

is illegal because all a repeal can do is repeal not set up the grounds for a replacement.

'Mother-to-be' is not, I think, an appropriate term as it shows bias, I prefer pregnant woman. International standards for abortion probably wouldn't work in an organisation this diverse. I would object to adoption being discussed in the same proposal. I would also object to that 's' you slipped on the end of parent. I assume the risks of pregnancy would be discussed as a risk of adoption?

Rose,
Acting Senior UN representative,
The Black New World,
Delegate to The Order of The Valiant States
http://home.ripway.com/2005-12/534911/uma-member.PNGhttp://home.ripway.com/2005-12/534911/unog-member.PNGhttp://home.ripway.com/2005-12/534911/God-member.PNG

I have a replacement resolution, but it's unfinished. Should I post it as a draft topic or add it into the original post?

its best to keep it on this thread then we won't get confused.

Do you have a text for the replacement resolution?

The people of Cluichstan must, yet again, ask why every repeal proposal must be backed up by a replacement proposal in order to garner support. If the resolution in question is a bad one, repeal it. If you feel a replacement is in order, draft one yourself.

Respectfully,
Sheik Nadnerb bin Cluich
Cluichstani Ambassador to the UN
Regional Delegate from Scybala

It was mentioned in the text of the repeal…

Rose,
Acting Senior UN representative,
The Black New World
http://home.ripway.com/2005-12/534911/uma-member.PNGhttp://home.ripway.com/2005-12/534911/unog-member.PNGhttp://home.ripway.com/2005-12/534911/God-member.PNG

-DEFINING abortion as termination of a pregnancy associated with the medically-caused death of a fetus
Quite emotive. I would prefer 'medically induced miscarriage' (OOC: It's the definition we used doing ethics things in religious studies, in case you were wondering /OOC)

-DEFINING adoption as the legal act of placing a child with a parent or parents other than the birth parents
It's clumsy but I have no real objection.

-NOTING that all women have the right to an abortion

-NOTING that options are available aside from abortion

-PERMITS abortion in any case, in all nations
Good, so what, very good.

-NOTES that birth as well as abortion is often a dangerous process, and as such, the woman should be informed of the risks of pregnancy, childbirth, abortion, and adoption
I'd like something to stop false information being presented as a risk.

-DECLARES that foster homes and abortion clinics be set up worldwide to accommodate for the demand for both options
Seems a bit basic.

-DECLARES that international standards must be made for adoption and abortions, outlined below.
As I said above, I object to them being treated in the same proposal.

ARTICLE I: Standards for Adoption

-1.1- Biological and adoptive parent(s) consent to the adoption, proven by properly filed legal documents
-1.2- Adoptive parents have clear criminal record and no history of any sort of domestic abuse
-1.3- The biological parent(s) and child have the ability to reunite at any given time, if they wish it.
-1.4- Adoptees have access to their adoption records if they can provide proper proof of identity, however, no other person may access said file.
I'd like to see provisions to allow the woman giving the child up for adoption to be able block the adoptee finding her. And I'm concerned about your plural.

In abusive relationships (or old ones) men may wish to keep the child to control the woman. There is no excepting for rape in your proposal.

I think 3.1 should also be removed as it is unfair to the adoptive parents and can't be all that good for the child.

Mandating a 'clear' criminal record is, in my opinion, a bit strict.

-1.5- Foster homes must meet proper standards for conduct, outlined below:

-2.1- Receive a clean inspection annually.
-2.2- Employees have no criminal record or history of domestic abuse
-2.3- Make a clear attempt to provide either a temporary or permanent living situation for the adoptee.
-2.3- Children are kept in a safe, secure environment and monitored properly for any sort of drug use.
-2.4- For children unable to function properly in foster homes, residential treatment facilities are available, which meet the above standards, but also include psychologists in order to prepare the child for return to foster care/their biological parents.
Fine, although I don' think there should be any return to biological parents.

-1.6- If the adoptive parents are dissatisfied with their adoptee, therapy be given to them, or otherwise, the option to return the adoptee to a foster home.
-1.7- Social workers must be provided for each foster family.
-1.8- Child welfare agencies must identify cases where circumstances make reunion with the biological parents impossible and set said cases up for a foster family as soon as possible.
-1.9- Social workers meet the following standards:

-3.1- Have no criminal history.
-3.2- Have proper training in fields involved in their work, such as child psychology
-3.3- Monitor the family on a monthly basis, or as requested by either foster parent or adoptee
-3.4- Upon failure to identify potential abuse situations, social workers are removed from the welfare agency’s payroll
Again, no criminal record? 3.4 also seems unreasonably strict. Although we would expect an inquiry peple are fallible and abusers can be very manipulative.

ARTICLE II: Standards for Abortion

-1.1- Abortion requires consent from the pregnant woman.
-1.2- Abortion is done privately, and records are never revealed in any case.
-1.3- If the woman chooses, she may undergo counseling and therapy both before and following the abortion. This counseling can be of any sort, including religious, if the woman so wishes.
Sorry grinding to a halt there. Surely that's unnecessary as most people can have counselling whenever they want.

-1.4- The potential father need not be informed of the abortion, although if the woman chooses, he too can be included in the process outlined here.
Seems unnecessary. Surely she could tell him herself.
-1.5- The abortion must be performed by a certified doctor.
Maybe a problem in some nations. Past tech and 'developing' ones especially.

1.6- Abortion clinics are treated as hospitals, and therefore must be kept clean and orderly
Fine.

Rose,
Acting Senior UN representative,
The Black New World
http://home.ripway.com/2005-12/534911/uma-member.PNGhttp://home.ripway.com/2005-12/534911/unog-member.PNGhttp://home.ripway.com/2005-12/534911/God-member.PNG

Thanks so much for the suggestions. I'll edit the post to include most of them, but I have a few questions.

Would it be better if I used "parent or parents" instead of "parent(s)", or just strike out out altogether? The basic idea was that it would support either the consent of one or both parents, but should I make it so the mother alone has the right?

I'll also be sure to limit/strike out the criminal record issue. What do you suggest? Clear of domestic abuse? Or just complete elimination of the subject?

On the subject of having adoption and abortion in the same proposal, should I make two?

I'm not sure about denying reunion, though. I mean, as long as it's not required, I think it should be okay. Can you explain why you're not for it a bit more?

Thanks again.

I think you should be aware of the huge outcry against micromanagement in the recent divorce debate. The proposal is likely to pass, but not confortably. I have no opinion as of yet about the need for a repeal, but I think you will need plenty of "devil advocates" if you want the replacement to be well received.

is illegal because all a repeal can do is repeal not set up the grounds for a replacement.Incorrect.

Repeals cannot create new law, but they can list what the Repeal author hopes the replacement will be. As written, it's acceptable as it isn't trying to actually replace the law. The "HOPES TO" and "DOES NOT SUPPORT" lines have no bearing on future Proposal.

We would endorse. As long as it contained the recommendations made by The Black New World.

Though we doubt it will ever reach the floor, given the meddling mindset of the majority of UN delegates, the people of Cluichstan support this repeal proposal.

Okay - I just don't get why you are doing this.

The repeal says you want to stop the unlimited abortion laws that exist at the moment.

Then the draft resolution says


-PERMITS abortion in any case, in all member nations


This is not going to change anything.

I also don't understand this part of the repeal


-NOTING that United Nations Resolution #61 "Abortion Rights" is too general to outline any sort of controversy erupting from nations against abortion


What exactly do you mean by that? (Forgive me if English is not your first language, but it makes no sense to me)

And finally


-NOTING that out of a total 15,917 nations, 6,549 were against (approximately 41% of the UN) the passing of Resolution #61


is not a good reason to repeal something in and of itself.

*cries* Why did my favorite topic have to start up while I'm getting beaten on my own resolution

No wait.....second favorite - marriage (specifically, same-sex marriage) is my favorite

*cries* Why did my favorite topic have to start up while I'm getting beaten on my own resolution

No wait.....second favorite - marriage (specifically, same-sex marriage) is my favorite

No offence, but is there something wrong with you? You like abortion and gay marriage debates? Argh. They tend to kill my brain.

No offence, but is there something wrong with you? You like abortion and gay marriage debates? Argh. They tend to kill my brain.

*grins* My gf has kinda made me a mascicist (sp?)

(Though considering her......hobbies, I was kinda expecting that.....)

If you feel a replacement is in order, draft one yourself.
The question was directed at the repeal author and it appears that he has drafted one himself.

Repeals cannot create new law, but they can list what the Repeal author hopes the replacement will be. As written, it's acceptable as it isn't trying to actually replace the law. The "HOPES TO" and "DOES NOT SUPPORT" lines have no bearing on future Proposal.
Cheers. I was worried that it may be taken that the repeal endorses the replacement so we have to do it. Nice to know it doesn't. Sorry about creating a fuss.

I'm just looking at this again and, as a representative to a country where drug use is legal I object to this:

-2.3- Children are kept in a safe, secure environment and monitored properly for any sort of drug use or other illegal activities
Maybe cut out 'of drug use or other'?

Would it be better if I used "parent or parents" instead of "parent(s)", or just strike out out altogether? The basic idea was that it would support either the consent of one or both parents, but should I make it so the mother alone has the right?
I think it should be just up to the mother but I'd settle for letting the countries involved decide. I just don't want it to be mandated that fathers have a choice. Especially if the conception wasn't consensual.

I'll also be sure to limit/strike out the criminal record issue. What do you suggest? Clear of domestic abuse? Or just complete elimination of the subject?
I'm not pretending to be able to come up with a definitive list but things like child abuse, sexual abuse, murder… perhaps it's a detail best left up to the original nation?

On the subject of having adoption and abortion in the same proposal, should I make two?
I've got no real objection to it being two. I just don't think it sends the right message.

I'm not sure about denying reunion, though. I mean, as long as it's not required, I think it should be okay. Can you explain why you're not for it a bit more?
My main objection is people would be put off from adopting children if there was a risk the birth parents could change their mind. Like abortion and childbirth, I think it should be permanent. Women looking to put their children up for adoption may be put off by the possibility that their child would bang on their door one day.

Thanks again.
My pleasure, like Forgottenlands this is my second favourite subject although my girlfriend isn't trying to kill me.

Rose,
Acting Senior UN representative,
The Black New World
http://home.ripway.com/2005-12/534911/uma-member.PNGhttp://home.ripway.com/2005-12/534911/unog-member.PNGhttp://home.ripway.com/2005-12/534911/God-member.PNG

The question was directed at the repeal author and it appears that he has drafted one himself.

I meant that comment as a general one regarding opposition to repeals and was not directing the "you" at my Yeldan friend.

Respectfully,
Sheik Nadnerb bin Cluich
Cluichstani Ambassador to the UN
Regional Delegate from Scybala

I meant that comment as a general one regarding opposition to repeals and was not directing the "you" at my Yeldan friend.
Ah, ok. I thought you were wanting me to draft one. He mentioned something about a replacement and I wanted to see it. This is one of those resolutions where I would only support the repeal if there were a suitable replacement ready.

There is already a resolution about adoption rules.

I usally believe in personal choice, but AI do not believe a woman has a right to murder.

Would it be better if I used "parent or parents" instead of "parent(s)"Both are gramatically acceptable.