11 Year Old Girl Is Pregnant, Sparks Abortion Debate

[Katzndogz]

Well I suppose they could eventually do a C-section.

Isn't it that she is at risk for carrying the child to term? If so, then she won't survive long enough to have a C-section.

It depends on the girl doesn't it. Here is a 9 year old girl that delivered a healthy baby girl, both mother and child survived quite nicely.

Girl, 9, Gives Birth in Mexico - ABC News

It is a good thing that in this country we provide for medically necessary abortions. The age of the mother isn't exactly determinative around the world since there are many instances of ten year old girls having babies.

 

[Mr. H.]

Well I suppose they could eventually do a C-section.

Isn't it that she is at risk for carrying the child to term? If so, then she won't survive long enough to have a C-section.

It depends on the girl doesn't it. Here is a 9 year old girl that delivered a healthy baby girl, both mother and child survived quite nicely.

Girl, 9, Gives Birth in Mexico - ABC News

It is a good thing that in this country we provide for medically necessary abortions. The age of the mother isn't exactly determinative around the world since there are many instances of ten year old girls having babies.

Not much concern in this thread about the baby...

 

[whitehall]

Abortion in this case is justified and the earlier the better. If the late term butchers get hold of her they will reach inside and turn the baby around in the birth canal to cause a breach birth and cause her further suffering and danger just so they can "legally" stab it in the back of the head.

 

[Katzndogz]

All 3 of my pregnancies were deemed 'high risk.' The last 26 years ago. All three are fine, married, and university graduates. Two are 'gifted' IQ wise, let's not get into commonsense.

I've seen nothing that would lead me to believe this girl, and she is only a girl, is in a life-threatening position. If someone can show that she's less than 80 pounds, I'd reconsider my position.

While personally I think that rape is one of the few reasons to terminate, it should be very early in pregnancy. Yes, 'health of the mother' too is a reason, but not a blanket reason. As indicated, if she's too developmentally small to sustain a pregnancy, I'd go with that. Truth is that girls are reaching puberty in 3rd and 4th grades now, at least in US.

i think your attitude would be different were you 11 y.o. and the victim of a rape.

It's rape because she's 11. Otherwise, it's a consensual sexual relationship with her 17 year old boyfriend. He's under 18. Just a child himself. It's not rape according to those who think that rape shouldn't be rape if both are under aged boyfriend and girlfriend.

 

[FA_Q2]

All 3 of my pregnancies were deemed 'high risk.' The last 26 years ago. All three are fine, married, and university graduates. Two are 'gifted' IQ wise, let's not get into commonsense.

I've seen nothing that would lead me to believe this girl, and she is only a girl, is in a life-threatening position. If someone can show that she's less than 80 pounds, I'd reconsider my position.

While personally I think that rape is one of the few reasons to terminate, it should be very early in pregnancy. Yes, 'health of the mother' too is a reason, but not a blanket reason. As indicated, if she's too developmentally small to sustain a pregnancy, I'd go with that. Truth is that girls are reaching puberty in 3rd and 4th grades now, at least in US.

i think your attitude would be different were you 11 y.o. and the victim of a rape.

It's rape because she's 11. Otherwise, it's a consensual sexual relationship with her 17 year old boyfriend. He's under 18. Just a child himself. It's not rape according to those who think that rape shouldn't be rape if both are under aged boyfriend and girlfriend.

Don’t think that anyone within reason would argue that it was not rape. I don’t agree with statutory laws that would charge a 17 year old and a 16 year old but you have left reason when you reach back to 11. It is no longer statutory at that point. Then it becomes molestation if I am not mistaken.

 

[PaulS1950]

Our laws do not apply in Chile. Our morality does not apply in Chile. This is a legal and moral question that must be addressed by the parties involved within the legal and moral codes that exist.

Life isn't always fair and I doubt that the father will even be prosecuted due to the codes of acceptable behavior in Chile.

I empathize with the mother and child but the reality is that she is going to have a baby, die or both will die. The father will likely get off - free to do it again.

 

[FA_Q2]

Our laws do not apply in Chile. Our morality does not apply in Chile. This is a legal and moral question that must be addressed by the parties involved within the legal and moral codes that exist.

Life isn't always fair and I doubt that the father will even be prosecuted due to the codes of acceptable behavior in Chile.

I empathize with the mother and child but the reality is that she is going to have a baby, die or both will die. The father will likely get off - free to do it again.

?
Who said it did?

Just because those things don’t apply does not mean that we, on this message board, cannot examine the situation in the light of our morality and laws.

The point you are making is moot, no one has demanded that we go over there and apply our rules on that girl.

 

[Flopper]

Her own doctors have said that the pregnancy is high risk.

My then 40 year old wife's pregnancy was designated "high risk". The physician attending the initial ultrasound quite emphatically pointed out Downs Syndrome indicators. He advised us to discuss our "options".

"High risk" pregnancies these days are most certainly survivable.

BTW, Ms. N., just who is "at risk" here?

It appears that any compassion you may have for children begins at the vaginal ejection. And nothing prior.

This isn't a discussion about trading a life for a life, it's a discussion about the Liberal ideology as it pertains to decisive rights. And I'm not shy in advocating decisive rights for those not yet able to exert those rights.

i am pro-life but this is the case of an 11 y.o. who has been raped and whose doctors say her life is in danger.

Three predominately Catholic countries, Chili, Dominican Republic, and Nicaragua are the only nations that make no exceptions in their abortion laws. In these countries, if your child is raped and becomes pregnant, legally she must face childbirth even if prevailing medical opinion is that it will cost both your child's life and the baby. That's the law.

The good news for this little girl is that safe illegal abortions are widely available in Chili as they are in many other countries with very strict abortion laws. Her parents can also take her Uruguay where all abortions are legal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_law

 

[Katzndogz]

i think your attitude would be different were you 11 y.o. and the victim of a rape.

It's rape because she's 11. Otherwise, it's a consensual sexual relationship with her 17 year old boyfriend. He's under 18. Just a child himself. It's not rape according to those who think that rape shouldn't be rape if both are under aged boyfriend and girlfriend.

Don’t think that anyone within reason would argue that it was not rape. I don’t agree with statutory laws that would charge a 17 year old and a 16 year old but you have left reason when you reach back to 11. It is no longer statutory at that point. Then it becomes molestation if I am not mistaken.

You are assigning love an arbitrary age? Who are you to tell these children that they cannot love whom they choose?

See how that works?

 

[Flopper]

My then 40 year old wife's pregnancy was designated "high risk". The physician attending the initial ultrasound quite emphatically pointed out Downs Syndrome indicators. He advised us to discuss our "options".

"High risk" pregnancies these days are most certainly survivable.

BTW, Ms. N., just who is "at risk" here?

It appears that any compassion you may have for children begins at the vaginal ejection. And nothing prior.

This isn't a discussion about trading a life for a life, it's a discussion about the Liberal ideology as it pertains to decisive rights. And I'm not shy in advocating decisive rights for those not yet able to exert those rights.

i am pro-life but this is the case of an 11 y.o. who has been raped and whose doctors say her life is in danger.

And there you have it... the empirical extremes. The ultimate love of a mother is to her own progeny, not to herself. But these days, what's love got to do with it...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pu8KFlfzk3Y]What's Love Got To Do With It (Black & White Version) - YouTube[/ame]

That's ultimate love, but it shouldn't be legislated by the state.

 

[Coyote]

Could an 11 year old survive an abortion?
Why is abortion the first avenue here?

Abortion should be a necessity, not an ambivalent choice of convenience.

Abortion carries less risk than a pregnancy.

An 11 year old raped and impregnated is a crime - she should not be punished further by being forced to have the child. That is not a choice of "convenience".

Rape is not convenient.

 

[Flopper]

The child was raped. Here in the US, that is one of the reasons an abortion can be granted.

I think you're a little behind the times. Remember Roe v. Wade, 1973.

 

[Wolfsister77]

Poor child.

I feel for her.

Raped, forced to carry a child and give birth.

Probably going to die from it.

What a life.

 

[Amelia]

In cases like these I most strenuously depart from some people on my side of the political aisle. When people such as Santorum say things about how a child who was impregnated by a criminal who should have been looking out for her has received a "gift from God", I have violent feelings toward those speakers.

 

[Katzndogz]

Her boyfriend that she had consensual sex with was 17. In this country her 40 year old rapist could send her into Walgreens to buy plan b or drop her off at a planned parenthood abortion clinic and leave cab fare for her at the desk.

Doesn't that make you sick? Seriously it should make any decent person vomit.

This country just loves abortion way too much. Raping little girls is okay as long as she can get an abortion.

 

[Amelia]

Her boyfriend that she had consensual sex with was 17. In this country her 40 year old rapist could send her into Walgreens to buy plan b or drop her off at a planned parenthood abortion clinic and leave cab fare for her at the desk.

Doesn't that make you sick? Seriously it should make any decent person vomit.

This country just loves abortion way too much. Raping little girls is okay as long as she can get an abortion.

The article linked in the OP didn't mention that it was her "boyfriend" who had sex with her. It says it was her mother's partner.

Whoever it was, the article said he was arrested, so what he did was apparently a crime in Chile. However, a link to other details would be appreciated.

I am sickened by 40-year-olds getting away with rape. And I am sickened by people saying that if the 40-year-old impregnated the child that was a gift from God. Are you sickened by only one of those? Do you actually believe that when a child is impregnated by an adult like a parent, stepparent, uncle, teacher, etc. who should have been looking out for her, that's God blessing her?

 

[Wolfsister77]

Her boyfriend that she had consensual sex with was 17. In this country her 40 year old rapist could send her into Walgreens to buy plan b or drop her off at a planned parenthood abortion clinic and leave cab fare for her at the desk.

Doesn't that make you sick? Seriously it should make any decent person vomit.

This country just loves abortion way too much. Raping little girls is okay as long as she can get an abortion.

What? She was raped for 2 years by her mother's boyfriend and she's 11.

 

[Wolfsister77]

Her boyfriend that she had consensual sex with was 17. In this country her 40 year old rapist could send her into Walgreens to buy plan b or drop her off at a planned parenthood abortion clinic and leave cab fare for her at the desk.

Doesn't that make you sick? Seriously it should make any decent person vomit.

This country just loves abortion way too much. Raping little girls is okay as long as she can get an abortion.

The article linked in the OP didn't mention that it was her "boyfriend" who had sex with her. It says it was her mother's partner.

Whoever it was, the article said he was arrested, so what he did was apparently a crime in Chile. However, a link to other details would be appreciated.

I am sickened by 40-year-olds getting away with rape. And I am sickened by people saying that if the 40-year-old impregnated the child that was a gift from God. Are you sickened by only one of those? Do you actually believe that when a child is impregnated by an adult like a parent, stepparent, uncle, teacher, etc. who should have been looking out for her, that's God blessing her?

Here's a link

Abortion debate flares in Chile over case of raped 11-year old. - The Washington Post

 

[Noomi]

I did some quick Googling and it appears this girl has little reason to be concerned, since childbirth at such a young age is well documented. And with today's medical achievements, her child is most certainly viable at any stage.

So why would you like to see this baby killed?

Her own doctors have said that the pregnancy is high risk.

My then 40 year old wife's pregnancy was designated "high risk". The physician attending the initial ultrasound quite emphatically pointed out Downs Syndrome indicators. He advised us to discuss our "options".

"High risk" pregnancies these days are most certainly survivable.

BTW, Ms. N., just who is "at risk" here?

It appears that any compassion you may have for children begins at the vaginal ejection. And nothing prior.

This isn't a discussion about trading a life for a life, it's a discussion about the Liberal ideology as it pertains to decisive rights. And I'm not shy in advocating decisive rights for those not yet able to exert those rights.

With all due respect, your wife was not 11 years old at the time she became pregnant. BIG difference.

 

[Noomi]

All 3 of my pregnancies were deemed 'high risk.' The last 26 years ago. All three are fine, married, and university graduates. Two are 'gifted' IQ wise, let's not get into commonsense.

I've seen nothing that would lead me to believe this girl, and she is only a girl, is in a life-threatening position. If someone can show that she's less than 80 pounds, I'd reconsider my position.

While personally I think that rape is one of the few reasons to terminate, it should be very early in pregnancy. Yes, 'health of the mother' too is a reason, but not a blanket reason. As indicated, if she's too developmentally small to sustain a pregnancy, I'd go with that. Truth is that girls are reaching puberty in 3rd and 4th grades now, at least in US.

i think your attitude would be different were you 11 y.o. and the victim of a rape.

Based upon what?

Based on the fact you would be a CHILD.
I think your opinion would change if your child was 11 and pregnant. Because if you intended for that child to give birth, you should lose your parental rights.