10-year-old rape victim denied abortion in OH

[*michaelsean*]

(07-04-2022, 07:08 PM)Lucidus Wrote: Roe, and later held by Casey, afforded the pregnant individual autonomy for the first 6 months until the fetus was deemed by the Courts to be legally viable, at which point the state could outlaw abortions in the interest of the potential life.  Agreeing with and supporting the Courts position on those determinations doesn't translate to being "OK with lack of autonomy".

It granted the individual two full trimesters in which to exercise their autonomy and have the freedom to make their own medical decisions. You see, it didn't strip the individual of their autonomy; it respected it until the point of reasonable restriction.

However, allowing states the power to ban abortions at any point in time, or altogether is very much in opposition with Roe. Dobbs allowed for states to disregard any respect for autonomy and granted them the power to force pregnant individuals to remain pregnant without a lengthy, rational amount of time for them to freely come to a very difficult decision.

So short answer is you were ok with limiting autonomy. It did strip their autonomy in the third trimester. If we can’t violate autonomy then there are no reasonable restrictions. Doctors of course can refuse, but we can’t limit it because it is now unpalatable.