12-year-old raped by relative can have abortion without parents’ consent, Alabama court rules

originally posted by: LungFuMoShi

If David Grimes the abortion guy, who is elderly...if he says it then it must be true.

*Dr* David Grimes has had 4 decades of actual hands on experience in

obstetrics and gynecology and is currently clinical professor at the university of

North Carolina School of Medicine.

I think his opinions are more qualified and valid than any of yours?

Naturally, he comes from a place without bias.

Like you?

Are you trying to change my mind?

Wouldn't dream of it .... I recognise when a door is shut!!

I'm not trying to change yours.

You dont have enough experience for that!

That what you just posted is meaningless to me.

As are most things I imagine

Because we all know elderly people can't be wrong...but i bet you a billion dollars that if I cared enough I could find an elderly doctor who completely contradicts the views of Mr Grimes. You'd probably completely ignore that, too, just just you ignored the fact that you failed to read all of my posts before your emotional outburst, earlier.

It seems if you followed the posts that I knew more about your posts than

you did.

a reply to: dawnstar

If the girl doesn't want the kid and does want an abortion then they should give her one. Screw her parental consent in this case being that there is obviously no capable parenting happening here in the first place.

Clearly the parental authority needs to be handed over to social workers here. Or perhaps some responsible member of her family that isn't ok with this girl being raped by someone in her own family.

I think this girl and her opinion on the matter should carry some weight here. Her mothers opinion should carry none. If the only people pushing for her to have the kid are pro-lifers who are doing it for their own agenda their opinions also should carry no weight here.

This seems like a simple case IMO. What would make it more complicated was if this girl actually wanted to have the kid. Now that to me would make it much more difficult to decide what to do about it.

a reply to: mOjOm

she's the one carrying the most risk, her say should carry much more weight than anyone's elses unless she is completely incompetent and unable to understand anything!

a reply to: dawnstar

I agree. It's the same reasoning which I apply to all women when it comes to abortions. They are the most invested person in the situation and should therefor have the right to make that call.

Here, being that the girl is only 12 makes it a bit more difficult as technically she isn't given the legal authority to make certain decisions being under age. However, her choice of what happens should in no way be ignored just because she's only 12. Although I think assessing how competent she is mentally should still be looked into. I say that not because I disagree with her decision because I do agree with it. But had she chosen the opposite I would say the same thing so I'm saying it here also. It would be hypocritical not to.

a reply to: jjkenobi

Convenience? I doubt there are many women using abortion as birth control.
There are too many much easier ways to prevent pregnancy.
Most abortions are probably to inexperienced young women who may not know how to effectively prevent pregnancy. It's a second chance. Correcting a mistake.
And no woman is ambiguous about pregnancy.

what gets me is that even if she had it, she probably wouldn't have been allowed to keep it

Probably not, but the point of forcing young women to have children is to ensure there will be lots of poor, uneducated people to vote for Republicans.

Whether their lives are good or bad is entirely unimportant to conservatives.

a reply to: jjkenobi

Who's killing babies? The court ruled on that, it's not a baby until it can survive outside the womb. Before that it's a fetus a zygote a mass of cells. so what's the problem? I mean if it's not a God thing why would you even care about another woman's choices? What business is it of yours. Any more than if the couple wears a condom or not is.

a reply to: mOjOm

maybe I am wrong, I kind of think that in many states, if not all, if a minor doesn't want an abortion, parental rights don't matter so much... the child's right to give birth is protected...

but, if the child is seen not to be able to comprehend what an abortion is and what effect it will have on her....
then well... I tend to think that she also wouldn't be able to comprehend just what being a mother means either...
I really think that if we took this logic, we'd have more abortions, not less!!!

originally posted by: CB328

what gets me is that even if she had it, she probably wouldn't have been allowed to keep it

Probably not, but the point of forcing young women to have children is to ensure there will be lots of poor, uneducated people to vote for Republicans.

Whether their lives are good or bad is entirely unimportant to conservatives.

And when those impoverished children need food supplements and Medicaid the conservatives will cut that spending. That life only matters when it's inside the woman's body. After that who gives a flying fig right?

a reply to: dawnstar

I'm sure it all depends upon the state.

But in this case, assuming she's find mentally I don't see the big deal here. She was raped by her own family. She got pregnant and wants an abortion. So give it to her for gods sake and after that do everything possible to help and protect this poor girl from any more abuse and trauma. The poor girl has suffered too much already.

She didn't want this to begin with and now wants to stop any further abuse for her life. That should be enough. Screw what anyone has to say about it.

originally posted by: Raxoxane
a reply to: dawnstar

Yes i agree this is cruel and totally senseless.I am pro-life but in the case of rape i can support the abortion,most especially if the rape victim is this young! What i do not understand-why was this child not given the morning after pill,after the rape,just to be on the safe side? That would have negated the need for all this trauma.

Maybe she didn't report it? Maybe it was too late by the time the pregnancy was discovered.

Did the baby commit a crine? Why must it be murdered?

Can't the State pay to raise it? Oh, it seems they don't WANT to and are allowing the abortion. How convenient for them.

originally posted by: Tempter
Did the baby commit a crine? Why must it be murdered?

Can't the State pay to raise it? Oh, it seems they don't WANT to and are allowing the abortion. How convenient for them.

It's not a baby yet. But the father did implant it illegally in this poor girl without her consent and so therefor she shouldn't have to deal with it if she doesn't want to.

The state could pay to raise it, but that wouldn't solve the problem of forcing this poor innocent girl to carry it and bring it to term and birth it however.

a reply to: mOjOm

well, in this case, the court decided she should have a waiver, but then the wacky da decided to appeal the decision, so another court decided she should have it... so, she did have it...
I have no idea how long it took to get though...

I'm just pointing out that if the girl isn't old enough to decide to have the abortion, then she isn't old enough to decide to have the child either... if that is the case, then it doesn't matter which way she leans, it's the child's guardian the would get to decide... you might be preventing a few abortions, but you will probably also be forcing a few minors that didn't want an abortion into it...

a reply to: Tempter

some people should really read up on the risks pregnancy poses on girls this young!!!

a reply to: dawnstar

I agree it should be the same across the board. However, in this case I don't think even the mother should be considered, as she is clearly an unfit guardian for this girl.

This child is not being properly cared for by her family obviously and should be in the care of someone else. Having to ask permission from a family member of the family you are being abused in seems pretty stupid to me. That's like asking permission of the husband for his wife to divorce him because he's been beating her.

This is really only difficult because of the legal rules regarding it. In reality I think the situation is much more simple. The girl was raped. Everything that is a result of that, including the rape itself should be reversed and/or stopped as much as possible. Everything from that act forward has been a criminal act of abuse against this child. If we had time travel we could just go back and make it not happen. I think we should do whatever is the closest thing to that.

a reply to: mOjOm

in this case, the decision, if she was found to be not mature enough to make the decision, then the decision should have fallen on the state since she was in foster care.. for the fifth time... because her family is so screwed up!!
if anyone really thinks that having the state make such a decision is a great idea and would reduce abortions, I'm sorry, but I would find that hard to believe!!
and forcing a women/girl to have an abortion she doesn't want would probably screw up her head more than anything else would I think!!!

a reply to: dawnstar

Wasn't there a Senator who said that if rape results in pregnancy, it's God's Will, and thus the lucky woman blessed by the Divine Rape should be forced to carry the product of forcible incest to term?

I'd say that guy, this attorney general and any who agree with their thinking should immediately have their sexual organs removed, for the safety of those around them.

a reply to: CB328

The problem there is that conservatives are supposed to be for smaller government and therefore less government intervention in people's day to day lives. It's a result of continued religious influence on the Republican Party and by trying to mandate what an entire gender can or can not do with their own bodies, they're actually embracing a very socialist or communist ideology which is extraordinarily ironic. Understanding this is what got Tomi Lahren booted from The Blaze because she understands that while she can personally be opposite abortions, it isn't for the government to impose values and morality on the citizenry. And yes, I totally understand that many people are opposed to abortions without a religious impetus but it doesnt change the fact that it's not a conservative approach and therefore very hypocritical. And I won't even get into the baby vs. fetus argument...

a reply to: dawnstar

I'd say the state has shown to be quite incapable of caring for this child also. Being switched between foster care and a family of abuse 5 times is hardly proper care.

I'm not sure what the best solution is to solve so many problems within so many different areas. The only problem at the moment that I think should be solved is the pregnancy by rape which this girl is suffering with.

This is one of those situations that I think has moved well beyond anything anyone would ever hope to have. What we're left with is trying to simply do the best we can. Give the girl what she wants, which is IMO also what is best for her, an abortion. Anything else is unthinkable IMO. Then get her to someone who can care for her as best as possible. IMO the only priority here is for her personally. F*ck her parents, the DA and everyone else who is acting on reasons other than this child's well being.

We can sit around and discuss what happens within the law and who does what all day but none of that is helping this girl now.