By LAURA SCOTT
The Kansas City Star
Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline is one of those masterful politicians who can make his point of view sound right, even though he is dead wrong.
Take the latest example. Advised, no doubt, by his anti-abortion hires in the attorney general's office, Kline has issued a legal opinion that makes it appear he is protecting teenagers from rapists and abusers.
But he really is trying to discourage young women from seeking abortions. And, whether intended or not, his opinion will also discourage sexually active teenagers from seeking birth control or medical care for sexually transmitted diseases.
Kline's interpretation of Kansas law is that doctors -- and other health care professionals and school officials -- must report evidence of teenagers having sex to the authorities as child abuse.
He relies on a Kansas law that says even consensual sex with a child younger than 16 is a crime. So, if it is criminal, the opinion goes, it constitutes abuse that must be reported, as required by law. His opinion affects anyone who is mandated by law to report indications of abuse.
Medical professionals say their practice has been to report evidence of legitimate abuse, as they are required to do.
Kline's opinion likely would make many young people decide not to seek medical care because they would fear it no longer would be treated confidentially. It also would jeopardize parents' involvement in their sexually active children's choices. Kids won't want to tell if they know a state child-abuse investigator will be on their doorstep if they do.
State Sen. David Adkins, a Leawood Republican, says the ruling even puts at risk parents who take their teenager to a doctor for treatment of a sexually transmitted disease or pregnancy. They potentially could be charged with conspiracy or obstruction of justice for trying to destroy evidence of a crime, he says.
That is how far some "creative prosecutors with an evangelical bent" may take Kline's interpretation of Kansas law, Adkins says.
It is difficult to find fault with the rationale that many teenagers are victims even when they consent to sex. This had to be the thinking of Kansas lawmakers when they passed the statutory rape law.
Teenage girls often are manipulated by older men who seek sexual favors, for instance. If a 29-year-old man is having sex with a 14-year-old girl, isn't that child abuse? Many of us would say yes.
But what about consensual sex between two teenagers? And what about cases where a girl gets pregnant and her parents do not want her to continue the pregnancy? (Kansas law requires parental notification before a minor can have an abortion).
In a letter to the Editorial Board of this newspaper, Kline defended himself.
"I am not seeking to prosecute consensual teen sex, nor do I have the resources to focus on such conduct," he wrote. "This does not change, however, that Kansas law makes such conduct illegal..."
Some say his arguments make a case for changing the statutory rape law. But that might not be a good idea. Sexual exploitation of children should be against the law. In cases of consensual teen sex, the question for most people is the age of the sex partner, which is a factor that's difficult to legislate.
Kline says that the law already provides lesser penalties if a teenager is the perpetrator.
Unfortunately, Kansas may need a judicial ruling on whether the law says abuse cases must be reported when there is reason to suspect that a child has been "injured." Or whether it means what Phill Kline says it does.
One thing is certain: If everyone follows the attorney general's line on this, increased numbers of sexually active young people will avoid adult guidance and help.
The result will be more unwanted teenage pregnancies and more children giving birth to children. Talk about child abuse. That can't be what most Kansans want.
To reach Laura Scott, assistant editorial page editor, call (816) 234-4452 or send e-mail to lascott@kcstar.com .