The Gov't Should Know Everything

Earlier this week, I posted a story about the Kansas Attorney General, Phill Kline, who, as I understoof it, sought to have doctors file a report with the state gov't when they believed that a minor had "engaged in sexual activity." At the time, I noticed the remarkably broad interpretation that phrase, "engaged in sexual activity," could be subjected to, but I did not look into it any further.

My post was incomplete.

Today, the New York Times ran a story on Mr. Kline's interpretation of that broadly worded phrase.

"This week, a federal trial judge in Wichita killed Mr. Kline's daft idea to require doctors, school counselors, and psychotherapists, among others, to report all sexual activity by people under 16, from kissing to sexual intercourse."

The reporting requirement is intended to alert authorities to incidents of abuse. To Kline, any activity, "from kissing to sexual intercourse," is automatically abuse - and could presumably be prosecuted as such.

The federal judge, Judge Marten, wisely observed that "Mr. Kline's blunderbuss reporting requirement would jeopardize the physical and mental health of adolescents by deterring them from seeking testing and treatment for sexually transmitted diseases, birth control and counseling. It would also hurt efforts to combat real child abuse by overwhelming social service officials."

A report must be filed with the gov't every time a psychologist, school counselor, or doctor has any information that could be construed to indicate that a minor may have had sex or even just kissed someone?

Kline is expected to appeal this ruling and his position is gaining political might as anti-abortion groups are climbing on board, "eager to expand the use of child-abuse reporting laws."

This emphasizes the critical need that the judiciary must stay independent and that the people must be allowed privacy in their medical decisions and treatment.

Think to yourself, if this policy was in practice, would you have been reported to the gov't?