Texas has proposed a a change in law that would make it illegal for minors to receive abortions without their parent's consent. You can read the proposed changes to the law here: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlo/78R/billtext/HB00945I.HTM. In a nutshell, before, when performing an abortion on a minor, a physician was required to give a parent 48 hours' notice save for emergencies for the health or life of the minor. The changes would require that the parents would have to give written approval before the abortion could take place.
Other changes include a switch from being able to file in any court to having to file in the county in which they reside, and a determination for whether the minor is sufficiently capable of making the decision on her own changed from preponderance of the evidence to clear and convincing evidence.
It does allow that "If the court finds that the minor is mature and sufficiently well informed, that requiring consentwould not be in the minor's best interest, or that requiring consent may lead to [(deletes) physical, sexual, or emotional] abuse, as that term is defined by Section 261.001, of the minor, the court shall enter an order authorizing the minor to consent to the performance of the abortion without consent of either of her parents or a managing conservator or guardian and shall execute the required forms." (h.b. 945).
I will not discuss the debate regarding the morality of abortion. In this country right now, abortion is legal, and states and the federal government are precluded from placing any UNDUE BURDEN in the path of the female seeking the aborton. This is a higher standard than is allowed for other fundamental rights, which require strict scrutiny. This is how it is, and it is through this standard that I base my disagreement with the changes. The undue burden standard is there for a reason. It's to ensure that females who want to get an abortion can get an abortion. In the past, states have required that women get the consent of their husbands before getting an abortion. This ran the problem of the women having to tell their husbands, and subjecting them to abusse, or worse. Under the auspices of privacy, and for the protection of the female, these laws were struck down. I see little diffference here. The proposed changes would subject a minor to a court hearing, where she'd have to prove through clear and convincing evidence that she's capable of making the decision herself (I can hear the old judge now, "you weren't mature enough to keep from getting knocked up, so you're obviously not mature enough to make this decision on your own."), or that she'd suffer abuse from her parents. If she can't prove that she'd suffer abuse, then she has to get the consent, even if she WOULD suffer the abuse. Then, she needs the consent, which may not be given, which would deny her of her fundamental right.
I don't like these changes, and I don't think that they would withstand review based on the current standards.