Abortion in AZ HB2564 PP5

There are several issues on the table with regards to whether or not the new AZ abortion law is ethical or not. First, making a woman have to speak with a doctor in person about her options and 24 hours before the abortion is done is unethical, in my opinion, since this could cause the woman to change her mind since she may be embarrased that she is even in this position or worse, she could be pregnant from an abusive family member and she may only get one chance to visit the doctor to get the abortion done. This mandate of orally and in person, could totally mess up her chances to take advantage of a one-time window that she can't afford to waste on a consultation visit. Second, mandating that a notary be involved for parental consent is a violation of constitutional law to privacy. Although the requirement is that this information placed in the notaries book remain confidential, it's not possible to do 100% of the time. There were plenty of times where I had to get something notarized and was able to read names and reasons of previous persons that had signed the book before me. Unless they plan on coming up with an individual book for every person that this requirement would be placed upon, this is not going to happen. Third, who goes to a total stranger, in this case a judge, to determine if an abortion is in the best interest of minor based on the minor's maturity level? I believe that if any minor were mature we wouldn't have to deal with most of the issues that come from them in the first place. It's life experience that brings about maturity and until a minor has experienced an abortion or being a single mother at least once, then we can all assume that, unless they became pregnant through some criminal sexual act, they are immature and will most likely not know what is or is not in their best interest. In addition to that, the judge will have no concrete background information, other than what he will be told by someone acting on behalf of the minor (which is a joke since I have had to deal with that part of the justice system myself personally) or what he will read in some paperwork drawn up against allowing the minor to have the abortion. He will not have solid information that the minor has parents that are drug addicts and the minor's self esteem is so low that she is looking for love in all the wrong places. Basically, the court will hope to see a level of responsibility in a minor which is contradictory to the whole process since if the minor was responsible then they would've avoided this pregnancy at all costs and because self esteem plays a role in a young woman's maturity, if she has low self esteem then the court will find that she is not mature enough to make decisions in her best interest. Then there are the issues of whether or not a judge is pro-choice or pro-life and I would bet my life that whichever way the judge's position is will sway him all the time to choose the option that goes with his belief system and not what's in the best interest of the minor. How then will our judicial system pick someone that is completely non-biased when it comes to abortions so that all minors can have a fair preceding? I also question why is it necessary to tell a woman of the anatomical characteristics of the fetus? Are we purposely trying to sway her to change her mind with this law if it is required that she be told if she was going to have a boy or girl? Last but not least, the contradiction that a minor can be automatically emancipated if they will not receive any finanacial assistance from their guardian so they can apply for public assistance, but...this public assistance cannot be used to get an abortion-what's the point? My take on this entire bill is if it's not broke then don't fix it. The changes to this bill just leave a bad feeling in my gut that this is just not going to benefit minors and the choices that should be made between them and their parents.