10-year-old rape victim denied abortion in OH

[Bengalzona]

Quote:10-year-old rape victim forced to travel from Ohio to Indiana for abortion

Quote:The case of a 10-year-old child rape victim in Ohio who was six weeks pregnant, ineligible for an abortion in her own state, and forced to travel to Indiana for the procedure has spotlighted the shocking impact of the US supreme court ruling on abortion.

The story of the girl came to light three days after the court overturned a nationwide right to terminate pregnancy, and Ohio’s six-week “trigger ban” came into effect.

Dr Caitlin Bernard, an Indianapolis obstetrician-gynecologist, said she had received a call from a colleague doctor in Ohio who treats child abuse victims and asked for help. Indiana’s lawmakers have not yet banned or restricted abortion, but they are likely to do so when a special session of the state assembly convenes later this month.

Abortion providers like Bernard say they are receiving a sharp increase in the number of patients coming to their clinics for abortion from the neighboring states where such procedures are now restricted or banned.

“It’s hard to imagine that in just a few short weeks we will have no ability to provide that care,” Bernard told the Columbus Dispatch.

But the case of the 10-year-old girl has placed prominent anti-abortion political figures in the position of balancing the rights of women and girls – including abuse victims – while defending abortion restrictions.

Republican governor Kristi Noem of South Dakota, mentioned as a potential running mate to Donald Trump in 2024, told CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday that she found it to be “incredible” that “nobody’s talking about the pervert, horrible and deranged individual that raped a 10-year-old”.

Abortions are now criminal acts in South Dakota “unless there is appropriate and reasonable medical judgment that performance of an abortion is necessary to preserve the life of the pregnant female”. Cases of incest and rape are not an exception under South Dakota’s law as it stands.

On Friday, the state also banned medical abortion by telemedicine and increased the penalty for the unlicensed practice of medicine when performing abortions.

Dana Bash, CNN’S State of the Union host, pressed Noem on whether it was right for a 10-year-old rape victim who was pregnant to have to cross state lines for a legal abortion.

Seeming to try to deflect, Noem said the rape of children is “an issue that the supreme court has weighed … as well”, adding that the public should also be “addressing those sick individuals [who] do this to our children”.

Asked if she would seek to have the law changed if a similar case occurred in her state, Noem replied: “I don’t believe a tragic situation should be perpetuated by another tragedy. There’s more that we have got to do to make sure that we really are living a life that says every life is precious, especially innocent lives that have been shattered, like that 10-year-old girl.”

Asked if the girl should have to have the baby, Noem responded that “every single life – every single life is precious. This tragedy is horrific. But, in South Dakota, the law today is that the abortions are illegal, except to save the life of the mother.”

But asked if allowing an abortion to be be performed on a 10-year-old would be considered as protecting the life of the mother, Noem did not rule out that interpretation.

“Yes, that situation, the doctor, the family, the individuals closest to that will make the decisions there for that family,” she said, returning to the issue that for many Republicans is the central focus of the abortion debate.

A 10-year old will die trying to deliver a baby.

I'm no fan of abortion. I think it is ugly and divisive and I think it has sometimes been abused by some women who serially use it in place of other birth control methods. At the same time, I find a law which will not permit this in the cases either rape or medical emergency when the life of the mother is threatened to be archaic and misguided in a civilized society. That is not "tough", that is perverse and sick.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jul/03/ohio-indiana-abortion-rape-victim?fbclid=IwAR3QP-RF2pf7vuvZ-nu2C1PBTiP33nI7MA7vXbWO7r0tcWEdyXvafTWCXLc

[Lucidus]

(07-03-2022, 06:32 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: A 10-year old will die trying to deliver a baby.

I'm no fan of abortion. I think it is ugly and divisive and I think it has sometimes been abused by some women who serially use it in place of other birth control methods. At the same time, I find a law which will not permit this in the cases either rape or medical emergency when the life of the mother is threatened to be archaic and misguided in a civilized society. That is not "tough", that is perverse and sick.

Once you grant a governmental body the perverse right to insert itself into an individual's body, other desired perversions are sure to follow. It's simply a byproduct of allowing the state unfettered control the uterus; a rather disgusting concept in and of itself.

The goal of abortion bans is not to be civilized, it's for one group of people to forcibly impose their morality on another group.

I find it rather frustrating when I see people say they don't want to force people to remain pregnant in cases of rape, incest or medical emergency, but are perfectly fine with forcing them to remain pregnant in all other cases.

A pregnant individual should be free of state intervention for an extended, reasonable amount of time during the pregnancy in which they can exercise their autonomy prior to a cutoff; which needs to be determined by medical science, not politicians or religious zealots.

I don't want the state to have unfettered control over a uterus; in any scenario at all.

[Sled21]

(07-03-2022, 07:40 PM)Lucidus Wrote: Once you grant a governmental body the perverse right to insert itself into an individual's body, other desired perversions are sure to follow. It's simply a byproduct of allowing the state unfettered control the uterus; a rather disgusting concept in and of itself.

The goal of abortion bans is not to be civilized, it's for one group of people to forcibly impose their morality on another group.

I find it rather frustrating when I see people say they don't want to force people to remain pregnant in cases of rape, incest or medical emergency, but are perfectly fine with forcing them to remain pregnant in all other cases.

A pregnant individual should be free of state intervention for an extended, reasonable amount of time during the pregnancy in which they can exercise their autonomy prior to a cutoff; which needs to be determined by medical science, not politicians or religious zealots.

I don't want the state to have unfettered control over a uterus; in any scenario at all.

Just out of curiosity, in the case of mutual consensual sex that results in pregnancy, you don't think the father should have any say in whether or not the child is killed? I've always been amazed the man has no say. (and I'm not talking about rape or incest)

[BigPapaKain]

(07-03-2022, 08:27 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Just out of curiosity, in the case of mutual consensual sex that results in pregnancy, you don't think the father should have any say in whether or not the child is killed? I've always been amazed the man has no say. (and I'm not talking about rape or incest)

Unless it's a one night stand, I imagine most couples would have that discussion.

For arguments sake, I'd like to point out that a wife does not have to sign off on a vasectomy, but most nearly all doctors require spousal consent for a woman to get her tubes tied. Now why do you suppose that is?

[Lucidus]

(07-03-2022, 08:27 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Just out of curiosity, in the case of mutual consensual sex that results in pregnancy, you don't think the father should have any say in whether or not the child is killed? I've always been amazed the man has no say. (and I'm not talking about rape or incest)

First, a fetus is not a child, just as a sperm isn't a fetus.

Second, the partner can and should be able to express their thoughts and preference, but the final decision should necessarily be that of the person who's body would be directly affected by remaining pregnant or having a procedure to end the pregnancy.

[*Nately120*]

(07-03-2022, 08:27 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Just out of curiosity, in the case of mutual consensual sex that results in pregnancy, you don't think the father should have any say in whether or not the child is killed? I've always been amazed the man has no say. (and I'm not talking about rape or incest)

Don't choose to have sex with pro choice women. 

And for the vice versa, if you're a dude who doesn't want 18 years of child support coming out of your paycheck, don't get in too deep with the pro life chicks. 

People need to communicate before they copulate. 

[Lucidus]

(07-03-2022, 08:54 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: Unless it's a one night stand, I imagine most couples would have that discussion.

For arguments sake, I'd like to point out that a wife does not have to sign off on a vasectomy, but most nearly all doctors require spousal consent for a woman to get her tubes tied. Now why do you suppose that is?

I wonder what would happen if the SCOTUS granted states the power to ban vasectomies, which are performed on average about 500,000 times per year and are on the rise after Dobbs; denying individual's the right to medical / reproductive choice? I'm guessing a certain segment of the American population would be outraged and demanding their "right" be returned, which would be the correct reaction to such a violation of personal / bodily autonomy.

[Goalpost]

(07-03-2022, 10:00 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Don't choose to have sex with pro choice women. 

And for the vice versa, if you're a dude who doesn't want 18 years of child support coming out of your paycheck, don't get in too deep with the pro life chicks. 

People need to communicate before they copulate. 

 Or we could just close all the bars and clubs.  

https://www.bustle.com/p/where-americans-are-meeting-their-one-night-stands-58418

[*Nately120*]

(07-03-2022, 11:24 PM)Goalpost Wrote:  Or we could just close all the bars and clubs.  

https://www.bustle.com/p/where-americans-are-meeting-their-one-night-stands-58418

I meant it more like the conservative response to a woman not getting an abortion is to say that IF you aren't ready for the responsibility of having kids THEN you shouldn't be having sex.  Well fellas, IF you aren't ready to deal with a woman having 100% of what happens to your semen THEN you shouldn't be having sex.

[BigPapaKain]

(07-03-2022, 11:24 PM)Goalpost Wrote:  Or we could just close all the bars and clubs.  

https://www.bustle.com/p/where-americans-are-meeting-their-one-night-stands-58418

I think we tried closing bars once before.

If I recall, all we got out of it was exploding basements and NASCAR.

[Truck_1_0_1_]

(07-04-2022, 09:37 AM)BigPapaKain Wrote: I think we tried closing bars once before.

If I recall, all we got out of it was exploding basements and NASCAR.

via GIPHY

[basballguy]

(07-03-2022, 11:33 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I meant it more like the conservative response to a woman not getting an abortion is to say that IF you aren't ready for the responsibility of having kids THEN you shouldn't be having sex.  Well fellas, IF you aren't ready to deal with a woman having 100% of what happens to your semen THEN you shouldn't be having sex.

What would you suggest in the case where my ex told me she was on birth control (but wasn't) and that netted me a kid that I ended up raising without her.  I had absolutely no say so in what happened there.  She had the baby when I was definitely not wanting another.  

The whole "it's a woman's body so it's her choice" is utter bullshit and a point of view I will never agree with.

Men most certainly deserve some influence and role in the decision making....whether it's an abortion OR to keep it.  

Oh and my daughter is awesome and in her 3rd year of college.  I got over my anger right when she came home.  :)

[Lucidus]

(07-04-2022, 03:01 PM)basballguy Wrote: What would you suggest in the case where my ex told me she was on birth control (but wasn't) and that netted me a kid that I ended up raising without her.  I had absolutely no say so in what happened there.  She had the baby when I was definitely not wanting another.  

The whole "it's a woman's body so it's her choice" is utter bullshit and a point of view I will never agree with.

Men most certainly deserve some influence and role in the decision making....whether it's an abortion OR to keep it.  

Oh and my daughter is awesome and in her 3rd year of college.  I got over my anger right when she came home.  :)

Could you not have used a condom to provide added protection; knowing that even if someone is on birth control, it isn't 100%?

It seems like you're placing all the responsibility on her, and accepting none for yourself.

[*michaelsean*]

(07-03-2022, 08:54 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: Unless it's a one night stand, I imagine most couples would have that discussion.

For arguments sake, I'd like to point out that a wife does not have to sign off on a vasectomy, but most nearly all doctors require spousal consent for a woman to get her tubes tied. Now why do you suppose that is?

I didn’t sign off on anything when my wife did.

[*michaelsean*]

I always assumed there were exceptions for rape.

[*michaelsean*]

(07-03-2022, 10:45 PM)Lucidus Wrote: I wonder what would happen if the SCOTUS granted states the power to ban vasectomies, which are performed on average about 500,000 times per year and are on the rise after Dobbs; denying individual's the right to medical / reproductive choice? I'm guessing a certain segment of the American population would be outraged and demanding their "right" be returned, which would be the correct reaction to such a violation of personal / bodily autonomy.

The whole anti-abortion argument is based on there being a fetus. It is a unique situation and there is no comparable male situation.

[*Nately120*]

(07-04-2022, 03:01 PM)basballguy Wrote: What would you suggest in the case where my ex told me she was on birth control (but wasn't) and that netted me a kid that I ended up raising without her.  I had absolutely no say so in what happened there.  She had the baby when I was definitely not wanting another.  

The whole "it's a woman's body so it's her choice" is utter bullshit and a point of view I will never agree with.

Men most certainly deserve some influence and role in the decision making....whether it's an abortion OR to keep it.  

Oh and my daughter is awesome and in her 3rd year of college.  I got over my anger right when she came home.  :)

I believe the answer is that both sexes need to be more perceptive and careful with the partners we choose.  

We've all seen Maury, how many women on there say the baby daddy promised her that he was fixed and couldn't get her pregnant?  I believe the general response is that she shouldn't have trusted his word. 

This stuff is going to fall more upon the people being responsible if these birth control restriction rumors and one to pass and we bulldoze and defund planned Parenthood. 

Don't stick your dick in deception.  I don't foresee much compassion coming down the pipeline on this. 

[Lucidus]

(07-04-2022, 03:59 PM)michaelsean Wrote: The whole anti-abortion argument is based on there being a fetus. It is a unique situation and there is no comparable male situation.

Both abortion and vasectomy deal with the reproductive system. 
One ends a pregnancy, while the other prevents pregnancy.
Each procedure seeks to avoid the same end result - having a child.

In neither scenario should the state have the right to interject themselves into a personal, medical decision. 

[*michaelsean*]

(07-04-2022, 04:20 PM)Lucidus Wrote: Both abortion and vasectomy deal with the reproductive system. 
One ends a pregnancy, while the other prevents pregnancy.
Each procedure seeks to avoid the same end result - having a child.

In neither scenario should the state have the right to interject themselves into a personal, medical decision. 

You can manipulate it how you want. It’s different. It’s unique. The fetus is the whole crux of the argument. Vasectomy and tubes tied can be compared.

[Lucidus]

(07-04-2022, 04:58 PM)michaelsean Wrote: You can manipulate it how you want. It’s different. It’s unique. The fetus is the whole crux of the argument.   Vasectomy and tubes tied can be compared.

Whether we're talking about fallopian tubes, vas deferens or the womb; all three are medical procedures are designed to avoid the same end result, which is ending up with a child. All three directly pertain to issues of personal / bodily autonomy, and the individual's right to freely make their own medical decisions.

However, my specific question wondered about the response if vasectomies we're banned. Whether you feel it's comparable or not, what would your reaction be to the state deciding to take away your right to get one?