10-year-old girl denied abortion in Ohio
10-year-old girl was denied an abortion in Ohio after the Supreme Court ruled last week that it was overturning Roe v. Wade, demonstrating the tangible impacts that the high court’s decision is having on patients seeking access to the medical procedure.
Here we go! You all ready for this total clusterfuck?!
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
A child abuse doctor in Ohio contacted Dr. Caitlin Bernard, an obstetrician-gynecologist in Indiana, after receiving a 10-year-old patient who was six weeks and three days pregnant, the Indianapolis Star reported .
Tags
Who is online
523 visitors
The girl in the pic isn't who this article is about! Just had to have a picture of something and that was the first one that popped up.
Rather than post a totally irrelevant picture, I would suggest that you seek out a photo from a different article on the same subject in order to use it as the required image for posting and indicate that it was necessary to do so, and failing that, just state that no photo was available and use your own avatar.
This article points out the ability for States to pass extreme cruelty laws - this was a situation where a 10 year old girl - not even close to reaching the age of consent was implied to have been "abused" (reference to the "abuse doctor" referring her) - why such sweet words? - she was RAPED, a CHILD RAPED, and as a mere child being forced by the government of her State to bear and give birth to a child, which would most likely totally ruin her life, and yet I've been criticized on this site for suggesting that the next step for the SCOTUS would be to bring back The Inquisition.
A pregnant 10 year old, I wonder who could be at fault?!
Just offhand, I would surmise some pedophile is at fault.
My bet is the dad or uncle.
The gop in Ohio is responsible for this law!
So, yes, a paedophile got her pregnant but it is the damn gop in Ohio keeping her pregnant...
Is the GOP preventing her from going elsewhere?
We are talking about a ten year old girl FFS!
She should not have to travel for healthcare.
You gonna pay for it? You being all pro life and shit, how about paying for a procedure that may save a little girl's life? Or do you not care about little girl's lives?
You see the retarded hole you have dug for yourself? God pro-lifers are fucking idiots.
Nope, I won't be paying for it any more than you will.
Instead of assuming shit you don't have a fucking clue about, why not ASK what my position on abortion is?
That way your posts won't appear foolish.
Are you anti-life??
Would you use the same argument if you had to go out of state to buy bullets?
You are right and I am sorry.
We have been at odds for so long that I can honestly say I have stopped "reading" your posts and only "read" what I am already looking for.
You have posted so many dumb things, and I have done the same, that I feel like we feel we cannot see eye to eye and are just out to slit each other's throats, but I think that is wrong and I don't want that. I want to start anew.
I am sorry Texan1211, I am sorry. This is my public apology and the only one anyone will ever see.
It’s a short article but apparently too much for some to read.
The child abuse doctor an obstetrician-gynecologist in Indiana, the Indianapolis Star reported this. She is getting an abortion in Indiana.
...based on my post below, i am going to let this go. this one.
What post? And are you seriously going to use my apology as an excuse to be a douche?
Please refrain from asking me silly questions.
Apology accepted.
My stance on abortion is and has been:
A woman should be able to have all the abortions she wants and can afford.
I also think abortion is a piss-poor birth control method considering the plethora of options available to prevent pregnancies readily available to men and women in today's world.
Agreed on all counts.
Thank you for the silly answer!
You should expect it based on your question.
If they get their way she'd have to go to Canada and then still get prosecuted. She's about 10 years too old for them to care about.
“A 10 year old needing an abortion, isn't an abortion rulings fault.”
A 10 year old required to carry to term is an anti-choice rulings outcome.
No winners here, only one example of the inevitable, innumerable unintended consequences when rights are inexplicably reversed.
FFS was my thought exactly
Can imaginary people be prosecuted?
It might have been the father FFS or a close relative or her pastor even
JFC the stupid shit some people say in defense of the alleged conservatives/gop and the SC for removing OUR rights
Unintended consequences?
This is exactly what all those faux small c christians and 'compassionate conservatives' and whack job evangelicals have been working towards for decades
“Anti-Parenting protection…”
Working for de santis?
“What is working for DeSantis ?”
What is ‘Anti-Parenting protection”?
She didn't get to choose her parents. Neither did I. Did you?
Considering it is a child abuse case- it could be the father; some other relative; or friend of the family. It is usually someone close to the child involved.
Whoever it is needs to be punished to the fullest extent of the law; the sick fuck.
So your comment was all about the perp, what about her? You know, the 10 year old girl?
Being pro life and all I would think you would be a little concerned with them....
So again, what about the 10 year old? The ACTUAL victim?
She was probably asking for it.
You really do need to put an /S behind that comment.
Lol i bet right? being all 10 years old and shit. Having the fucking audacity to ovulate, and you know, be sexually female (take that trans shit somewhere else).
[DELETED]
No sarcasm?
Yes. But also sound advise.
true
Do I though? I really hope not.
Ronin was hoping you were serious.
Her abusive step father dressed her in way too sexy clothing and he couldn't control himself because of it.
She seduced him
What?! Oh my. Uh-uh.
In Ohio, YUP! 10 year old mothers are a thing.
And what becomes of the therapy she is going to need being that she will be a member of a rare club of young mothers?
Yeah, being raped at 10 isn’t that traumatic. Imagine the therapy she’d have to undergo after giving a baby up for adoption. Horrifying .
Don't be flip with me, "man." She will have to carry and give birth all while 'holding' down a school term. How many of your children underwent that?
Do you realize how horrifying your forced birth mindset is? Who thinks that it is okay for a ten year old child to be forced to carry and to deliver her rapist's spawn? I do not get it...
Sure. Going to school would have scarred her for life. Not the rape. . The abortion cured all her trauma
“Horrifying .”
Sarcasm is one thing. This dipshitery is beyond the pale. Horrifying, indeed.
back when i was in high school in the late 70s and into the mid 80s( when my ex wife graduated ) , i know of at least a good dozen HS aged girls that did just that. and that was just my high school , with an averge annual graduating class of maybe 40 kids . and there was always 2 or 3 per class.
i will grant that these people were a good 5-8 years older than this girl in the article , but they did have the choice to keep and carry to term , keep or give up the baby . many of them eventually married the baby daddies too, and some went on to be single moms by choice .
now before anyone jumps to conclusions about what I think , no one has really asked me where i stand on the issue , so before someone attacks , maybe they should ask .
Dude... Why even say that as a joke?
Shit not even I did that.
I asked you how many? I will assume none since you ignored the question. So don't presume to know the trauma of childbirth at ten, because there will be trauma (and school-life) to deal with.
Where do you stand on this issue and please be thorough (for our benefit).
Trauma began with male insertion, which is a step beyond in the scheme of this whole 'happening.'
well, I Think that the extremes of both the pro life and pro choice sides took over the issue a long time ago. personally i am in the middle . but i am also only 11 years older than the Roe ruling , so i have lived with it pretty much my entire reproductive life and had it pretty much said to my face that a man has no say in the choice even IF married to the woman choosing to do so . i solved that issue by having my tubes tied at 32, she didnt want any more kids , it was cheaper for me to have it done ,and it was an in and out proceedure where she would have had to have had invasive surgery and spend the night in the hosp , if everything went well. , and the kicker was , i had to get my then wifes permission and consent to do so, she could have had anything done she wanted without my consent . ironic huh?
If it were left to me to decide , i would say no bans would be put in place before X number of weeks gestation , and no abortions preformed after X weeks of gestation
the no bans before because sometimes it takes time to actually find out someone is pregnant
the no abortions part because usually a person getting one can say usually within a month if thats what they will do , so that leaves an ample window .
I put x because those things can be negotiated to gain a majority .
The caveate i would add , is that no bans shall apply in the cases of rape , incest , or if the mothers health is detrimentally affected to the point she would lose her own life carrying to term . or if it has been reasonable determined the fetus had a problem with development or deformity that it would not likely survive . call that one medically advised nessesity no matter what point of gestation it happens to be .
I think ronin made some good points about how roe was overturned and how that could have been avoided over the almost 40 years it was in effect .
I also think that the high court , decided to take away a political football and litmus test for any future member of the judiciary, especially the high court , nominated for an elevated position , meaning , they took the ball away and tossed it back into the states different fields .
This does not preclude the federal entity from coming up with something either , thing is the feds will have to come up with something a true majority would support as i have attempted to do above .
point is , the extremes of the issue have been in control for far too long and those that are the real majority need to step up , and neither extreme will be happy , especially with what i propose .
Hey man, don't try to make me the bad guy here. I have 2 young daughters and live in a sadly conservative state. If anything is off with them we are taking a vacation out of state, I am not going to allow cocksuckers like Clerence Thomas to ruin my girls lives.
My statement enhances your own. Read it again, please, and see if it is not so.
Up to now, I agree with everything you have discussed. Including making departures from the state if essential to/for your daughters liberties and choices. Why should a girl or woman be required to have children? Choice is optional. An abortion ban is a state or federal mandate. .
First, there are a great many "ironies" in the matter of human life and copulation. Too many to go on about here and now.
Second, if it was left up to me I would say the same about x number of weeks of gestation. And yes, extremities collectively suck.
Third, liberals have a thing about privacy and trusted that stare decisis meant something poignant to honorable justices. Now we learn that our "Justices" are merely men and women draped in symbolic robes who have dispelled the quaint notion many carry that there hearts (and opinions) are for the people and not for a chosen "party."
Fourth, the question of abortion was always meant for the states to decide constitutionally. But, politicians corrupt Justice. So in or out of turn, the "question" moved over to the courts and then it became a matter of uniformity under the law.
Fifth, in my opinion, abortion or sexual intercourse should not be an issue of politics (about likes and dislikes). We are talking about individuals here and sadly it is clear republicans/conservatives are all for individual liberties and freedoms until they are not. Then they are in lockstep to handicap liberals.
Yes, thank you for your insights.
So can i take it there is no objection to my line of thought ?
if stare decisis , were absolute , we would still have very many things that would adversely affect many people , seperate but equal , dredd scott , would be examples of "other " overturned rulings of the high court .
what many fail to understand , is there is no such thing as "settled law " that only exists until a case falls between the cracks and the law does not provide for that particular case .
And in such cases it IS the courts duty to re examine such "settled law " and it is their perogative to do what they feel must be done to get the issue resolved , in this case , the issue was returned to the states to decide for each jurisdiction as they see fit , until the federal entities of the legislative and executive come up with something that can be applied equally to all states . in other words , do their F'n jobs like should have been done 39 years ago and ample oppertunities to do so have presented themselves . and not make a political football out of the issue to bludgeon one side or the other .
I dont know about others , but what i proposed is what i have already talked to my state reps about and will be trying on my part to advance to become state law .
Yes. No proper objection to x periods of gestation and termination of pregnancies based of certain extenuating factors and acts.
State law would be relatively better and according to the (nearby) aspirations dear to the heart of this republic. However, people are not responsive to each others need. There seems to be a 'critter' of domination deep in the hearts of those players who want to dominate. And, so it goes.
Stare decisis (aka: settled law) is opinion that has been put through its 'rigors' and still stands based on many testings. Unfortunately, we are seeing that in the clutches of shall we say men and women of questionable interests lying in wait-a court can judge anything it wishes. BTW, this will be the case if states and congress does not follow up on its stewardship to listen to the people it serves.
Furthermore, there will always (it seems) be this divergence whereas what the/a majority wants is opposed to what is correct, decent, and most important, civil to the citizenry.
Alas! Now we see it. Woe are we to fight all our lives for the 'gaps' and openings between law and opinion.
Something i have come to realize AND accept , what was once acceptable to a prior generation/s , usually becomes totally unacceptable to one that follows sometime in the future , and that future generation also has the right to tear assunder whatever concept a prior generation deemed worthy .
So whatever is decided today , is likely at some point in the future be it near or far , be set aside as not applicable to those that are alive at that time. one can fight it all one wants , it wont change the outcome .
where did i get that? off the top of my head from life lessons .
And yet our nation has no great or essential need for baby "excesses" since some/plenty adults here complain about the lifes/tyles and quality of life/lives they will support now! So dis-invested are some "Americans" in their fellow citizens they are willing to secede whether than diversify and open their minds to "gems" of possibilities. (That is, there are Americans in our country who can not stand to live free if others enjoy the freedoms they choose for themselves.)
Sorry, if you are asking the redundant question of who is at fault that the girl couldn't get an abortion in Ohio; then blame the previous and current state legislatures and governors. They had ample opportunities to change the state laws regarding abortion since Roe vs Wade; and chose not to do so. You can also blame the Democrats that pre Reagan held bullet proof majorities in the House, Senate, and the Presidency and could have codified Roe into law at any time. Hell, the Democrats could have done it in the first few months of Obama's first term; and there is nothing Republicans could do about it. Instead they chose to play politics and use abortion as a threat to keep themselves in power. They lose the presidency and Republicans get a conservative court and Roe is gone.
They should have realized that the pendulum in the Supreme Court swings both ways; the same way it does in politics. They thought that they were going to have a liberal court that would uphold Roe forever. Critical thinking is not the strong suit of politicians at any level of government.
Abortion is now up to the states. Some will have no abortion; some will have greatly restricted abortion; and some will go completely bat shit crazy like California and have abortion up until the birth due date.
I don't care if leftists hate this current Supreme Court. They have made rulings both for and against conservative positions. Think Republicans are thrilled Title 42 and Stay in Mexico were just ended by the Supreme Court? Time for Congress at the federal and state levels to get off their asses and do their damn jobs for a change if they want to fix things. If not then it is up to voters to elect candidates that will get things done!
So you are okay with a 10 year old being forced to give birth?
At least I am honest enough to say that some "lives", depending on how you want to define life, matter much more than others.
Sad commentary that a 10 year old could not get an abortion in her home state.
Lol America baby! Shoot a kid in the head, eye roll, the idea of terminating a cluster of cells... "SCOTUS saves us!"
What are you trying to say?
Our priorities are as fucked up as possible
Honestly if these mass shooting assholes REALLY wanted to make a statement they would be better off at bible camps
And... Big shock to everyone, she was raped.
I am honestly disappointed to not see the anti-abortion crowd on this seed. You would think they would be here celebrating the forced birth of a 10 year old rape victim.
This is EXACTLY what they wanted.
Just remember , just because someone is pro choice, doesnt mean they are pro abortion , there are many subtle shades in between , about as many shades as there are individuals .
I completely get that, and my entire position is... it is none of my fucking business.
i use to think that way after i got married , until i realized i had no say at all and it was completely out of my hands , then i had daughters , and when one came to me to tell me she was pregnant at a young age , i had the wisdom to ask her what she wanted to do , she told me i was going to be a grandpa . she could have done whatever she wanted .
so its none of your business , until its affecting someone you care about , one way or another.
keep in mind i am the product of choice , In 1961 , my mom was in the army , and found out she was pregnant with me , she was ORDERED by the military to have a proceedure that was in effect an abortion , she went AWOL, until the proceedure couldnt be done, she took a dishonorable discharge for failure to obey , ( which was later changed ) because SHE didnt want an abortion . I was born 2 weeks after her discharge .
Mark, we are 100% on the same page here. I have two young daughters, and of course I want the world for them, and if they were older I would ask what they think and want to do. Right now there is no question, they will not be having kids while they are teenagers and whoever tries is going to be dead.
2 daughters , 3 grand daughters
my daughter was 17 , just turning 18( i laugh now remembering telling her she couldnt start dating until she turned 30) when she told me i was to be a grandpa for the first time , she has since given me 4 more grandkids , she FINALLY followed my route and got her tubes tied after the last one was born on the 10th of last month .
personally i dont believe in abortion , except for the instances i mentioned , rape , incest or health of mom, but i also can understand there will be cases that are actually not for me to say ., hense what i came up with above ,that to me is acceptable . it took me along time to get to that point though , and alot of different influences (life lessons ).
Amazingly, It appears no one was arrested for raping a 10 year old in Ohio during this time frame.
What are the odds? Strange how there's nothing to back this up but the word of a political activist abortionist.
The results of forced birth in this case would probably result in dead or badly injured 10 year old and fetus. And lots of medicial costs, who pays the bills?
Not to mention the emotional damage. How must it feel to know that you're being punished with a dangerous and painful experience for somebody else's crime? I can't imagine she would ever see the world in a positive light again. Survivors of sexual abuse have enough trouble recovering. There is no reason for the state to make it even harder for them.
Birthing costs for imaginary babies are astonishingly cheap.
If this was an imaginary baby there would not be a problem and it probably would not be in the news
Or maybe an abortionist called a friendly newspaper who did no investigating and simply ran with the story because it perfectly fit the narrative they were pushing.
No police reports have been filed alleging a rape of a 10 year old in Ohio around May 6th, despite a legal duty to report it. The formerly publicity happy abortionist is now refusing to answer any questions once people became suspicious of her story, even ducking questions from friendly outlets like Snopes.
But sure. People win the lottery. Maybe the incredibly rare event of a 10 year old getting pregnant happened o exactly six weeks to the before the Dobbs decision occurred and the six week abortion ban went into effect And maybe the" child abuse doctor" violated his or her legal duty to report the rape of a ten year old and although while willing illegally protect a rapist, wouldn't lie to the Ohio abortionist that the soon to be aborted baby was 72 hours younger than it was and instead sought out a publicity hungry abortionist certain to make it all public.
Speaking from a country outside the US,
Have read all the comments above.
It just amazes me completely that such a situation could even exist. I sort of don't even believe what I'm reading. It's not a joke is it ??
LOL. Join the club - it's a VERY small one.
A hoax to drive the narrative...
Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost just said that his office has no evidence of a raped ten-year-old child who was impregnated, including a request for lab results. He also noted that Ohio law would have allowed for an abortion in such a case.
https://twitter.com/JonathanTurley/status/1546636535763722240?s=20&t=g_UY0vHV88Ycvo-Sjs0yRg