Girl, 9, aborts twins after rape

If I may sway from the Religous aspects, and spin more towards the possible truth to this story, which is, of course, what we seem to do here.

Has anyone taken into consideration that the story itself may not be entirely true, or the girl's age has been falsified?

Typically, a young girl cannot get pregnant until she ovulates, and the first ovulation usually occurs 2 weeks or so before her first period.

There have been extremely rare cases, and flat our weird stories, of young girls being impregnated, but I have to stop and wonder if any of this can be true.

If the 9 year old girl had ovulated, she would most likely had to have her period, and I just find it hard to believe a young girl that age is even capable, medically speaking. Ovulation and menstrual cycles don't typically start until they reach 11-13, given the odd rare case.

Just tossing this out there for ATS'ers smarter than me to discuss.

reply to post by SlinkyDFW

In recent years the onset of puberty has been earlier (and there's been concern that it's due to chemicals in the environment) and 9 or 10 for a girl is no longer really that unusual. Earlier than average, but hardly impossible.

reply to post by SlinkyDFW


Stranger things have happened.

Peruvian five-year-old Lina Medina, accompanied by her 11-month-old-son Gerardo, and Doctor Lozada who attended her son's birth, are shown in this 1940 file photo taken in Lima's hospital.

When her child was born by Caesarean section in May 1939, Medina made medical history, and is still the youngest known mother in the world.

Lina Medina's parents thought their 5-year-old daughter had a huge abdominal tumor and when shamans in their remote village in Peru's Andes could find no cure, her father carried her to a hospital.

Just over a month later, she gave birth to a boy.

Full Story
And this took place in the same part of the world. OK. Peru is not Brazil, but close enough. Makes you wonder about the people of that area.
Maybe there are more females able to become pregnant at such an early age but these two girls were just unfortunate enough to have been molested to find this out.

Now. Before anyone starts looking for a retraction in any of my statements, I acknowledge that this girl and baby both survived even with 1940's medical technology, but the girl in this current story was carrying TWINS. That is a big difference.

[edit on 8/3/2009 by VIKINGANT]

And five is a big difference from nine. And the 1940's is a big difference from the 2000's. Alas child abuse is the same perennial evil, with one signifigant difference it has now in its most egregious form found recognition by the state in that abuse which is absolute and deprives them of their right to life.

I remember a few years back the newspapers reported another 9 year old was dropped off in a South Texas Hospital... the girl was in labor... she had a C section and if I remember right had a baby boy.... the child was naturally taken from her and both placed into state foster care... I don't remember many details but I do remember the church (Baptist in this case) Going on record and saying a child born of incest was a demon spawn and should not have been allowed to go full term...

I guess depend on what church your dealing with you get different answers? Either way I still feel bad for the child,... all of them...

reply to post by VIKINGANT


This is exactly the story I was referring to in my post. A five year old giving birth? How is this medically possible?

This has got to be a hoax. There can be no way a five year old can ovulate...let alone carry a baby full term. This has to be medically impossible.

No offense and all the respect in the world....I call BS on the 5 year old and the 9 year olds.

Someone's looking for a paycheck.