A new U.S. Supreme Court ruling allows states to require that parents be notified “if possible” when their teenage daughters seek abortions. But it could have wider implications on parental rights and the family as the basic decision – making unit in society. The 6-3 decision upheld a Utah abortion – notification law which requires doctors to tell parents about their minor daughters request for an abortion before performing the operation. Failure to obey the law subjects the doctor to a $1,000 fine or even a year in jail. Paul Tinker. deputy Utah attorney general who successfully defended the statute through its appeal. interprets the high court ruling as recognizing fundamental family values to an extent not reflected in other recent decisions. Although cautious in commenting on news accounts until he has read the actual decision, Tinker said the state had argued elements beyond the question of abortion involving parental rights in major decisions affecting children. The case drew wide attention because the Supreme Court had ruled earlier that a state may not allow parents to have veto power over a daughter’s abortion. it tested how far a state may go in exercising its power to regulate abortions. Chief Justice Warren E. Burger, waiting for the majority. stressed that Utah and other states arefree to impose a requirement for parental notification if possible when three situations exist: The girl is living with and dependent on her parents; she is not married or otherwise “emancipated”; she has made no claim or shownthat she is mature enough to make the abortion decision for herself, or that her relations with her parents might be affected seriously by notification. What about a girl living! in a separate apartmenti but still under the sponsorship and support of her parents? Tinker’s interpretation is that she still is subject to the notification ruling. ”Emancipation” generally requires two conditions. he indicated – the girl is able to support herself and she is “on her own” by parental action or consent. The Utah law had been challenged by a 15-year-old girl, identified on court records only as “H. L.” Susan Roylance. national vice president of United Families of America which filed a “friend of the court” brief in the lawsuit. said: “We see this decision as a giant step forward in recognition of parental rights and responsibilities.” To what extent the high court ruling will curb abortions remains to be seen. l3ut as it bolsters and unifies the parental-family role in basic decisionmaking, it will perform a highly-positive service indeed.