Abortion test case - another can of worms

Reading this on the BBC has raised a few interesting questions. The Crown Government has successfully argued that parents have no right to know if their daughters, under the age of 16, are seeking terminations or treatment for sexually transmitted diseases. The most interesting of the published comments came from Philip Sales (presumably QC), who is reported to have argued that:

"The UK has very serious problem with high teenage pregnancy rates - and confidentiality was a key component of government policies to reduce conception rates and improve sexual health."

Now, in a country that officially does not have abortion on demand, this seems very like a backdoor policy to reduce teenage pregnancy via abortion; education on conception and sexual health being the other twin pillars of a triumvirate birth reduction strategy. It also would seem to be based on the notion that the state: the health care services: and the minor, are the only morally and legally involved entities in the information flow. These seems to be counter-intuitive in a state where parents can be issued ASBOs (Anti Social Behaviour Orders) for their children's behaviour, and can also be imprisoned (yes, sent to gaol) for their children's truancy.

I would argue that if Government policy is premised on parental responsibility for their children, then this self-same policy should preclude the exclusion of parents from the information loop. It is patently absurd to argue that in a country where a minor cannot have a tattoo without the active collusion of a parent, it is perfectly acceptable (in law) for the same child to have a termination outside of the cognisance of their parents. I can accept that the parents may not have the right of decision, but they should be empowered to help their daughters deal with the possible traumatic aftermath of their decision, and be enabled and empowered to provide their duty of comfort and care to girls who have, legally speaking, been raped.