South Florida 13 Year Old Girl Argues for Right to Abortion

The pet project of the religious right (enforcing the former while denying the latter) has real life implications on real people stuck in real situations no amount of metaphysical and legal hand wringing can solve.

A 13 year old south florida girl ("LG") in her own words before the state:

Sun-Sentinel.com

"Why can't I make my own decision?"

That was the blunt question to a judge from a pregnant 13-year-old girl ensnared in a Palm Beach County court fight over whether she can have an abortion.

"I don't know," Circuit Judge Ronald Alvarez replied, according to a recording of the closed hearing obtained Friday.

"You don't know?" replied the girl, who is a ward of the state. "Aren't you the judge?"

Against a backdrop of state and federal efforts to pass a parental notification law for teen abortions, the exchange was typical of L.G.'s pluck as she argued that she had the right and capability to make her own decision, despite a move by the Department of Children & Families to seek a judge's permission for her abortion.

"I think if I want to make the decision, it's my business and I can do that," she told the judge.

The DCF is the teen's legal guardian after she was taken away from her parents for abuse or neglect. State law allows minors to have abortions without notifying their guardians. Experts say the law extends to wards of the state, raising the question of why this girl's decision has ended up before a judge.

Really, every bit of this article is important to read, (please do), but here's the case:

DCF Secretary Luci Hadi requested a judge's ruling, according to a department statement released Friday. DCF attorneys filed an emergency motion Tuesday morning, the same day L.G.'s caseworker was prepared to take her to a clinic for the abortion.

"The Department of Children and Families has the custodial responsibility to do what is in the best interest of the child," the department said.

Alvarez had ordered a psychological evaluation to determine L.G.'s mental condition and whether she would be harmed by terminating the pregnancy or giving birth.

The case is now before the 4th District Court of Appeal where it has been fast-tracked after attorneys for the American Civil Liberties Union filed an emergency appeal Wednesday, arguing that neither the judge nor DCF should be involved in L.G.'s decision.

While delaying any ruling until the appeals court decides, Alvarez held a hearing Thursday to weigh arguments.

The DCF is concerned "LG" will suffer "detrimental effects" if she undergoes an abortion.

"L.G." seems pretty convinced she would suffer worse from being forced to carry a child to term and birth it.

L.G., who told Alvarez she had run away at least five times from her youth shelter, maintained, "It would make no sense to have the baby."

"I don't think I should have the baby because I'm 13, I'm in a shelter and I can't get a job," the girl said as Alvarez and her guardian ad litem, assigned to shepherd her in the legal system, questioned her.

L.G. laid out different reasons for wanting an abortion.

"DCF would take the baby anyway," she said, but later added: "If I do have it, I'm not going to let them take it."

She also questioned the health risk of carrying the fetus to term.

"Since you guys are supposedly here for the best interest of me, then wouldn't you all look at that fact that it'd be more dangerous for me to have the baby than to have an abortion?" she asked. Alvarez called that "a good point."

Medical experts even verified "L.G." has reason to be concerned about giving birth at her age (not that her economic concerns aren't valid).

Dr. Ethelene Jones, an expert in obstetrics and gynecology, testified earlier in the hearing that abortions are "definitely" safer than full term pregnancies for girls L.G.'s age.

"At her age and at her stage of gestation ... her risk of death from an abortion procedure is about 1 in 34,000," said Jones, who has held positions at Planned Parenthood and the ACLU. "The risk of death in pregnancy is about 1 in 10,000."

A psychologist testified the girl isn't 'crazy' (as some would like to conclude for a homeless 13 year old not wanting to be a mother against her will), and can make rational decisions.

Lynn Hargrove, the court-appointed psychologist, testified L.G. had a "mild mood disorder" but did not have "a significant psychotic or delusional thought process" that would interfere with rational decision making.

"L.G." got pregnant while living on the streets after a recent episode of running away from her shelter. The "decision" has not yet been made for her, but it will result in some upset people. Strangers mostly. People like me and you and wingnuts in the streets protesting whatever decision the court makes. Shades of Schiavo no doubt.

Too bad we can't just let her decide. That's what pro-choice is all about. Pro-life on the other hand is about making that decision for her. To hell with the consequences. As long as some church group in Kentucky feels good about their personal relationships with Jesus and the GOP, forcing a 13 year old girl to give birth against her will (perhaps die) is just alright with them.

If only Mark Twain were alive today: Seems to me it's always the biggest bastards in our society pressing upon women to make more.

Nice quote, Mark Twain just has a way with words. Also like his comment about fools, not that there are to many, but lightning isn't distrubeted right..

Anyways, let her die, who cares, sure the baby will die to, but she deserves to die foir having pre marital sex. Wait, I am not a souless brainless right wing zombie.... The point of Pro-Choice is CHOICE!

Originally posted by James the Lesser
Nice quote, Mark Twain just has a way with words. Also like his comment about fools, not that there are to many, but lightning isn't distrubeted right..

It's a hypothetical attribution. If (being the operative word) Twain were alive today... Kind of like something Reagan might have said if he only had a brain. I fill in where I can.

Glad you posted this Rant - I could not believe that Florida, once again, seems to be insinuating itself into the personal choices of its populace.

Couple of things of note:

The DCF is the teen's legal guardian after she was taken away from her parents for abuse or neglect. State law allows minors to have abortions without notifying their guardians. Experts say the law extends to wards of the state, raising the question of why this girl's decision has ended up before a judge.

DCF sure seems to have dropped the ball in this case and would appear to be pretty negligent since she got pregnant while under their custody and contro. But more importantly Florida statute is very clear in this matter - there is no parental notification required for minors seeking abortion. I have to agree with experts on this - why is this even an issue, the courts have no jurisdiction here.

DCF Secretary Luci Hadi requested a judge's ruling, according to a department statement released Friday. DCF attorneys filed an emergency motion Tuesday morning, the same day L.G.'s caseworker was prepared to take her to a clinic for the abortion.

"The Department of Children and Families has the custodial responsibility to do what is in the best interest of the child," the department said.

Guess that doesn't include educating this girl on how to prevent getting pregnant in the first place.

To force this child to carry a baby to full term could have lasting effects on not only her psyche but her body as well. She is completely unprepared for something like this and her decision should be honored. And doesn't even begin to factor in the costs involved. If the state is found to have an interest (by some conservative activism) do they also have an obligaton to feed, clothe and educate the baby until it reaches majority.

Sick and wrong.

Bleys

What do 13 year old girls know about life

Was there a choice? YES, the choice to have sex.

Is the fetus a human yet? No one can know for sure, but as a civilized people you must error on the side of caution!

What we are talking about here is an inconvinece of a 13 year old girl for nine months followed by a 6 to 24 hours of pain. Would I wish this on anybody no. But she did make a choice.

At the end you will have a 13 year girl returned to normal 99.99% of the time guilt free and retaining a life lesson that will prevent future mistakes, a new life, and a happy family ready to adopt and provide for that new life of that new child.

If the abortion happens the girl will be fine for now, possibly experience guilt later in life (maybe not). The opportunity for life of the child is gone, the adoptive parents continue to wait. But most importantly, the 13 year old girl learns that condoms and other birth control are not neccessary becuase it will take just a few hours at the clinic to "fix" the problem.


This is my opinion. I understand it is a heated issue and I understand that many people are very passionate about it.

This is a most interesting subject, mostly because "L.G." is only a year younger than me. So it makes me wonder what in the world is going on with my generation?

Let's say that this pregnancy poses a strong chance of harming L.G. In that case I'll say grant the abortion. If it was consentual then well although the baby by no means deserves to die, she's 13. I don't really think it's right for a 13 year old girl to have to die for one mistake (even if it was a big one). Although abortion is still murder, the fetus isn't technically a living human being so the mother has higher priority. However this is only if the pregnancy and child birth pose a threat to the mother.

Now let's pretend that it was a rape. Let's say it poses a threat to L.G., same as above only this time the mother definatly doesn't deserve to die.

Let's now say that won't pose a threat but the sex was consentual. No abortion. Sorry but the child will be taken care of and it's not right to murder a fetus on the grounds of inconvinience. Life has consequences and abortion in this scienario is little more than an easy way out at the expense of an innocent.

Finally let's say it was rape and won't pose a threat to the mother. Sorry but once again no abortion. If this were the case would the mother deserve this? No. Either way it's still a child's life at stake. Sure she'll suffer the inconvieninces of having an increased appetite, having to get maternity cloths, she'll appear to just be fat for a while (thats probably the phase she's in right now), she lost her virginity, some right wingers might call her a whore, etc. Then theres labor and the child birth itself. Thats going to be extremely painful. However pain is nothing compared to the death of an innocent. For those of you with kids, you'd take a stab in the back for them wouldn't you?

Wait, she is old enough to decide to have sex or not, but to young to decide to have an abortion? WTF are you people talking about?

Originally posted by cyberdude78
Let's now say that won't pose a threat but the sex was consentual. No abortion.

Okay, I'm going to try this real loud, because I've been screaming it all day.

IT'S NOT CONSENTUAL! ANY SEX WITH ANY 13 YEAR OLD CHILD IS RAPE!

I don't care if she was doing her best impression of Jodi Foster in TAXI DRIVER, walking down the streets in Hooker Boots. We don't live in Bangladesh, she can't give consent for sexual intercourse.

THAT MAKES IT RAPE!

That makes the abortion justified, unless you actually want to admit your true feelings about forcing rape victims to carry their children to term.

The "Life at all Costs" crowd never considers the ramifications of their actions. They never look at a week down the road, they're like petulant children who steal candy, sitting in the aisles, shoving hershey bars down their throbbing, fat little gullets - never once stopping to consider the true cost of things they want - that they'll eventually have to pay for.

In this case, you open up a door for truly sick organizations like NAMBLA to argue their case of adult/child love. The girl WAS raped, and she should be allowed, by law, to have the abortion. If you try and stop that abortion, by claiming that she consented to the sex, then you make the arguement that 13 year olds actually have the LEGAL RIGHT TO CONSENT TO SEX.

You didn't think this through too good, did you?

Hey thats just my feelings. I agree that by law (which I disagree with) she should definatly be allowed to have the abortion. As sad as it is I have to admit, we should grant the abortion in order to uphold the constitution. Yeah I don't like it either but this country is nothing without a constitution that is obeyed. So yes it's wrong, but by law it's discrimination to disallow the abortion.

If somegets pregnant there old enough to decide what they think is right or wrong. Its a womens choice not the churchs or anybody elses choice to make. People ought to stop imposing there morals on society and if those people are bored they should get a hobby!

She's a new teenager...she doesn't understand the whole thing yet. The whole abortion thing is stupid to me...you shouldn't be able to do it.

Originally posted by The Cojo
She's a new teenager...she doesn't understand the whole thing yet. The whole abortion thing is stupid to me...you shouldn't be able to do it.

So...she messed up, and she doesnt deserve the chance to clean up her act?

Im 13, and my freind got pregnant (im in UK, shes 14), and luckly, because we live in Britain, she could have an abortion. Sure, she was a bit messed up for a month, but better that than having a physical, economic and mental burden for the rest of her life (sorry if hats blunt, but at that age, thats all a baby will be).

So guys, get over it, choice is what is important, who is anybody else to dictate wether or not I (assuming im female, which im not), can have an abortion-MY CHILD-MY CHOICE!

Thanks

Crackity

What damage physically was done to the child during the abortion. What damage later in life from a pyschological standpoint, if the child, now a grown woman who is able to care for a child cannot have a child? There is an old saying, it goes something like this "Act in haste, repent at leisure."

Now before anyone gets mad at me, I think that women should be allowed to choose to have abortions. The operative word here is women, not a 13 year old child. Not without parental notification, or the consent of a legal guardian, in the case of incestual rape. A pregnant 13 year old is rape, no ifs, ands, or buts.

Originally posted by James the Lesser
Wait, she is old enough to decide to have sex or not, but to young to decide to have an abortion?

I'd have to agree with this standpoint. If you are old enough to decide to have sex, you are old enough to decide to have an abortion. I realize that this may look bad, but this stems from my belief that if someone is old enough to give their life in a war, they are old enough to vote. The two may seem unrelated, but are in my mind.

it is up to her wether nor not to have an abortion well it should be that way, some people on here stated that she was to young to make desisions like that and another said what does a 13/14 year old know about life.
well let me talk from experience here. you would be surprized what a person that age know and feels. i was 13 when i fell pregnant with my first child and took the desision to have her they way i saw it i was old enough to do the deed to old enough to take the consequenses.

this girl does seemed clued up to me she has said that she does not want to bring a child into her situation, leave it be people its her choice, she knows what she feels and thinks regardless to what her age is

Originally posted by Croat56
What do 13 year old girls know about life

Negatory. The real question is, 'What do parents have todo with major decisions?'.

Originally posted by Croat56
What do 13 year old girls know about life

A lot more than you give them credit for.

I say let the girl have an abortion.

The girl is messed up.. she will never lead a "normal" life, she will be unseccesful in anything she does.. she is for lack of better terms "trash".

Oh yeah. She is. I don't like being politically correct. She is the bottom rung of society, for her to procreate would be for the worse of society.

However, allowing her to have an abortion should come with punishments of sorts.

I do not see why any state should have to pay financially for the actions of a slutty 13 year old runaway. So the state should not pay.. she should raise the funds her self.. might teach her a little more responsibilities. What ever happend to street justice.. Anyways.. As far as her health goes the worse damage from an abortion is trauma.. which I gather from this article she has little feelings and self respect let alone for others, she should do well. The worse damage from an abortion is the childs life, which would be hell with a disgusting excuse for a mother like that. The next .. punishment.. of sorts, that I would personally like to see for this .. girl.. is a forced starlization. If the state has to pay for her slutty deeds then perhaps it ought to ensure this girl never come back, is no longer a burden on society, and that he line stops with her.

Of course, if she can pay her own way.. go for it.. screw half the city as you can always get an abortion. Perhaps I am to hard on her. Perhaps not. 13 years old. Disgusting.

Every rational person with full faculties should have the right to do what ever they want with their bodies.

God is the one who gave us free will. Quit trying over rule him.