Ex parte Anonymous

• Decision Date: 14 January 1992
• Citation: 595 So.2d 497
• Parties: Ex parte ANONYMOUS. 1910461.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

Page 497

595 So.2d 497

Ex parte ANONYMOUS.

1910461.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

Jan. 14, 1992.

PER CURIAM.

A minor petitions this Court to review a judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals, 595 So.2d 496, affirming a judgment of the juvenile court denying her petition for a waiver of parental consent to an abortion. We remand.

The minor, a 17-year-old child, resides with her parents. She currently attends high school and her grades are average or above. On approximately December 1, 1991, she was examined by a physician and found to be pregnant. On December 17, alleging that she was approximately 32 days into her pregnancy, she filed a petition in the juvenile court for a waiver of parental consent to an abortion. Pursuant to her request, the court appointed an attorney to represent her. On December 19, 1991, following a hearing, the court entered a judgment denying the petition. On January 2, 1992, the Court of Civil Appeals affirmed the judgment of the juvenile court.

In her petition for review before this Court, the minor contends that the juvenile court failed to follow the procedure prescribed by the Parental Consent Act, Ala.Code 1975, § 26-21-4(f) and (g). These subsections provide:

"(f) The required consent shall be waived if the court finds either:

"(1) That the minor is mature and well-informed enough to make the abortion decision on her own; or

"(2) That performance of the abortion would be in the best interest of the minor.

"(g) A court that conducts proceedings under this section shall issue written and specific factual findings and legal conclusions supporting its decision and shall order that a confidential record of the evidence be maintained for at least four years."

(Emphasis added.) Thus, under this section, the petition for waiver of parental consent may be denied only if the court specifically finds both that (1) the minor is immature and not well enough informed to make the abortion decision on her own, and (2) that performance of the abortion would not be in her best interests.

Following its hearing on the matter, the juvenile court issued the following judgment:

"After hearing the testimony presented and considering same, the court finds as follows:

"1. That the child's concerns about her parent's reactions are speculative and her fears are not substantiated by any testimony regarding past behavior or conversations with her parents.

"2. The court does not find that consent of her parents is not in her best interest; therefore, the request is hereby denied."

The petitioner contends that the juvenile court erred in two respects. First, she contends that the court applied the wrong test in its determination that abortion was not in her best interest. Second, she argues that the court failed to enter on the record the specific facts on which it must also necessarily have concluded, in order to satisfy the statute's first prong, that she was immature and not well enough informed to make the abortion decision on her own.

Touching briefly on the petitioner's first contention, we note that she presented considerable testimony bearing on the question whether abortion was in her best interest. She expressed fears that the news of her pregnancy would "ruin" her relationship with her parents and that she might be forced to leave home as a consequence. She further testified that the putative father, who was also a minor and currently attending high school, was in no better position to raise a child than she. She stated that she would not be able to raise a child and attend college simultaneously and that her parents, who were both employed fulltime, would be unable to forgo employment to help her raise a child.

The minor's testimony included a number of factors relevant in determining whether abortion is in her best interest. As this Court observed in Ex parte Anonymous, 531 So.2d 901 (Ala.1988), a number of factors are relevant in making such a decision:

"The plurality in [Bellotti v. Baird, 443 U.S. 622, 642-43, 99 S.Ct. 3035, 3047-48, 61 L.Ed.2d 797 (1979),] indicated some considerations relevant to a finding that an abortion is not in a minor's best interest:

" '[A]n abortion may not be the best choice for the minor. The circumstances in which this issue arises will vary widely. In a given case, alternatives to abortion, such as marriage to the father of the child, arranging for its adoption, or assuming the responsibilities of motherhood with the assured support of family, may be feasible and relevant to the minor's best interests.' "

Ex parte Anonymous, 531 So.2d at 905-06. Despite testimony that a number of...