CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 51Reproductive Health and ContraceptionAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive HealthEthics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare

Young women’s experiences obtaining judicial bypass for abortion in Texas

Open access
Coleman-Minahan, Kate, Stevenson, Amanda Jean, Obront, Emily, Hays, Susan·2019·Journal of Adolescent Health
DOI 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2018.07.017PMC PMC7274206
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Purpose Like many states, Texas requires parental consent for adolescents under 18 to access abortion care. Adolescents who cannot obtain parental consent can try to obtain a judicial bypass of parental consent through the court system. Little is known about adolescents' experiences with the judicial bypass process. Working with Jane's Due Process, an organization providing legal representation for adolescents, we explored adolescents' experiences with the judicial bypass process.Methods We conducted phone interviews with 20 adolescents, 16-19 years old in Texas between September and December 2016 about their experiences trying to obtain a judicial bypass. Data analysis included inductive and deductive coding based on theories about engaging with the court system and stigma regarding abortion and adolescent sexuality.Results In addition to unpredictability and logistic burdens such as finding time away from school and arranging transportation, participants described the bypass process as "intimidating" and "scary" and described judges and guardians-ad-litem who shamed them, "preached" at them, and discredited evidence of their maturity. Data suggest adolescents internalize stigma and trauma they experienced through rationalizing both the need for the bypass process and disrespectful treatment by authority figures.Conclusions We found the bypass process functions as a form of punishment and allows state actors to humiliate adolescents for their personal decisions. The bypass process was implemented to protect adolescents from alleged negative emotional consequences of abortion, yet our results suggest the bypass process itself causes emotional harm through unpredictability and humiliation. Despite participants' resilience, the process may have negative consequences for adolescent health.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2018.07.017

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Extensive empirical literature suggests that judicial bypass is poorly designed to achieve the end of protecting mature adolescents' ability to control the abortion decision and supporting immature adolescents' access to abortion when in their best interest.

    “However, extensive empirical literature suggests that judicial bypass is poorly designed to achieve this end.”

    From The role (and limits) of developmental neuroscience in determining adolescents' autonomy rights: The case for reproductive and voting rights (2024) · cites this paper as Coleman-Minahan et al., 2019

    The Results (“The process is traumatic”) describe judges discrediting evidence of adolescents’ maturity and denying bypass even after finding an adolescent mature and well-informed. This supports concern that the process can fail to protect mature adolescents’ decisions. But the Discussion limits the findings to participants’ experiences in Texas, and the paper says little is known about bypass experiences; it does not establish the claim about an extensive empirical literature or assess access for immature adolescents when abortion is in their best interest. Page numbers were unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Lacking any standard guidance in assessing maturity of an adolescent, courts are free to draw on whatever information they deem relevant, whether GPA, clothing or posture, or the judge's own attitude about the appropriateness of abortion.

    “Lacking any standard guidance in assessing maturity of an adolescent, courts are free to draw on whatever information they deem relevant, whether it is the adolescent’s grade point average, their clothing or posture, or even simply the judge’s own attitude about the appropriateness of abortion (Coleman-Minahan et al., 2019, Hendin, 2023).”

    From The role (and limits) of developmental neuroscience in determining adolescents' autonomy rights: The case for reproductive and voting rights (2024) · cites this paper as Coleman-Minahan et al., 2019

    The Results sections “The bypass process” and “The process is traumatic” describe variable questioning and judges or guardians ad litem relying on personal opinions about abortion, including discrediting evidence of maturity. The paper does not say there is no standard guidance for assessing maturity, nor does it identify GPA, clothing, or posture as criteria courts use. No page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [37]The Safety and Quality of Abortion Care in the United States. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press; 2018. 29897702

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Coleman-Minahan, K., Stevenson, A. J., Obront, E., & Hays, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Colorado Boulder (US)
  • The University of Texas at Austin (US)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Adolescent Health
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-01
Volume
64
Issue
1
Pages
20-25
ISSN
1054-139X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jadohealth.2018.07.017
PMC
PMC7274206
OpenAlex
W2890666994
Cited by
51
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1
FWCI
4.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Adolescent Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Colorado (R24 HD066613)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R24 HD42849)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Ethics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare
Keywords
judicial bypass, abortion access, adolescents, parental consent, abortion stigma, adolescent sexuality, guardian ad litem, humiliation, emotional harm, Texas abortion law, young women
MeSH terms
Abortion, Legal, Adolescent, Female, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Texas, Parental Notification, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review