Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No witness to the unreported alleged rape?
She didn't understand why she was sick, and also, apparently, didn't notice she stopped having periods.
Mother doesn't notice her cheer leader daughter is knocked-up?
Doesn't seem like anything associated with this story warranted action until the child was discovered to be damaged goods.
As for the child, she was a person.
We don't euthanize people that suffer brain damage in auto accidents, so why is this different? https://allthatsinteresting.com/aktion-t4-program
There are usually no witnesses to rape, how often does sex happen in front of people? She was 17 and raped by someone she went to school with, unfortunately not reporting rape is common. Victims/women are shamed, not believed. This was 2005, too, so before increased awareness and more changing attitudes to rape and other sexual assault. Before Me Too.
She explains she was traumatized after, understandably, and also that she did not show outward signs of pregnancy, did not get big. There is a whole show called I Didn't Know I Was Pregnant dedicated to women who had no idea - I don't get it either, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen or there aren't perfectly logical explanations for why women can go months without realizing they are pregnant. Perhaps her baby wasn't moving because she was so brain damaged (really, she lacked much of her brain), so maybe she couldn't even feel the pregnancy.
The child was not "damaged goods," she was barely a viable person. She died after a year, barely had a brain. Would never walk, talk, really function at all. The article explains she had trouble sleeping because her body could not process sleep hormones. Had constant seizures, couldn't regulate her body temperature. It's not even brain damage, it's lack of a complete and normal brain, from before birth. It's a severe birth defect incompatible with life without medical intervention. The baby suffered, her young mother and extended family suffered along with her.
I do not understand how anyone can dare to judge a situation like this. A scared young rape victim with a severely ill baby, a baby not compatible with life. Not our business. Anyone here could do differently if they wanted, but this is what she says and what she chose, or would have chosen if she could have. And that's just not my business, I would not want to even be in her shoes to have to decide.
Quote:
The RHA permits abortions when — according to a medical professional’s “reasonable and good faith professional judgment based on the facts of the patient’s case” — “the patient is within twenty-four weeks from the commencement of pregnancy, or there is an absence of fetal viability, or the abortion is necessary to protect the patient’s life or health.”
In other words, women may choose to have an abortion prior to 24 weeks; pregnancies typically range from 38 to 42 weeks. After 24 weeks, such decisions must be made with a determination that there is an “absence of fetal viability” or that the procedure is “necessary to protect the patient’s life or health.” That determination must be made by a “health care practitioner licensed, certified, or authorized” under state law, “acting within his or her lawful scope of practice.” https://www.factcheck.org/2019/02/ad...-abortion-law/
Agree the choice of the word whim is misplaced, but the reality is that the Health exemption is so broad as to be meaningless. As per the same "fact check" that you quoted, the nature of this exemption is described below"
"New York’s new law does not explicitly define “health.”
In what is considered a companion case, Doe v. Bolton, the U.S. Supreme Court held that “medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors — physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman’s age — relevant to the wellbeing of the patient. All these factors may relate to health. This allows the attending physician the room he needs to make his best medical judgment.”"
Note that in NY, such medical judgement does not need to be exercised by an actual Dr, but merely the abortion provider.
So yes, full term healthy babies can be aborted for non life threatening reasons such as the mother feeling too young, too old, being in a difficult family situation and other non defined emotional reasons. I can understand why some would categorise this as being so broad that using the word whim could be appropriate.
Will this happen at all, or even often. Probably not.
The child was not "damaged goods," she was barely a viable person. She died after a year, barely had a brain. Would never walk, talk, really function at all. The article explains she had trouble sleeping because her body could not process sleep hormones. Had constant seizures, couldn't regulate her body temperature. It's not even brain damage, it's lack of a complete and normal brain, from before birth. It's a severe birth defect incompatible with life without medical intervention. The baby suffered, her young mother and extended family suffered along with her.
I'm kinda hoping that the absence of most brain function at least kept the baby from suffering. But who knows?
Quote:
The RHA permits abortions when — according to a medical professional’s “reasonable and good faith professional judgment based on the facts of the patient’s case” — “the patient is within twenty-four weeks from the commencement of pregnancy, or there is an absence of fetal viability, or the abortion is necessary to protect the patient’s life or health.”
In other words, women may choose to have an abortion prior to 24 weeks; pregnancies typically range from 38 to 42 weeks. After 24 weeks, such decisions must be made with a determination that there is an “absence of fetal viability” or that the procedure is “necessary to protect the patient’s life or health.” That determination must be made by a “health care practitioner licensed, certified, or authorized” under state law, “acting within his or her lawful scope of practice.” https://www.factcheck.org/2019/02/ad...-abortion-law/
Agree the choice of the word whim is misplaced, but the reality is that the Health exemption is so broad as to be meaningless. As per the same "fact check" that you quoted, the nature of this exemption is described below" "New York’s new law does not explicitly define “health.”
In what is considered a companion case, Doe v. Bolton, the U.S. Supreme Court held that “medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors — physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman’s age — relevant to the wellbeing of the patient. All these factors may relate to health. This allows the attending physician the room he needs to make his best medical judgment.”"
Note that in NY, such medical judgement does not need to be exercised by an actual Dr, but merely the abortion provider.
So yes, full term healthy babies can be aborted for non life threatening reasons such as the mother feeling too young, too old, being in a difficult family situation and other non defined emotional reasons. I can understand why some would categorise this as being so broad that using the word whim could be appropriate.
Will this happen at all, or even often. Probably not.
So what is your conclusion, that the law needs to be repealed because we need to protect unborn babies from mothers who want to kill them? Have you ever been pregnant? Do you know what it's like to carry a baby for 9 months and give birth to it? My guess is you don't have a clue, and that leads you to believe that there are women out there who want to kill a viable fetus and that there are physicians who would go along with that nefarious plan. SMH
So what is your conclusion, that the law needs to be repealed because we need to protect unborn babies from mothers who want to kill them? Have you ever been pregnant? Do you know what it's like to carry a baby for 9 months and give birth to it? My guess is you don't have a clue, and that leads you to believe that there are women out there who want to kill a viable fetus and that there are physicians who would go along with that nefarious plan. SMH
The conclusions is pretty obvious. Just go back to the old law which fully covered the circumstances of non viability and/or risk to the life of the mother.
In your emotion you seemed to have missed the bit where I said; "Will this happen at all, or even often. Probably not".
Oh and no physicians are required for this in NY. Makes you shake your head doesn't it.
The facts don't change. NY now has a law where a mother can choose to terminate the life of a full term healthy baby without the need for a physician to be involved. Who would do that? Not many or no one.
The conclusions is pretty obvious. Just go back to the old law which fully covered the circumstances of non viability and/or risk to the life of the mother.
In your emotion you seemed to have missed the bit where I said; "Will this happen at all, or even often. Probably not".
Oh and no physicians are required for this in NY. Makes you shake your head doesn't it.
The facts don't change. NY now has a law where a mother can choose to terminate the life of a full term healthy baby without the need for a physician to be involved. Who would do that? Not many or no one.
So why the need for the law?
The old law did not cover non viability of the fetus. Until this year, it was a crime in NY for an abortion to be performed past 24 weeks unless the mother's life was in immediate danger. NY had outdated laws. This article is great, to read entirely, at explaining NY's old and new law and late-term abortion in general.
A woman highlighted in the article had to travel from NY to CO a few years ago and spend $10k for an abortion at 31 weeks, when she found out her baby had a condition that was incompatible with life. NY clearly did not have the same laws before 2019.
Within the law, late-term is either severe birth defects or serious life and health issue for the mother. As much as the right would like to pretend otherwise.
Again anything can be designated "health of the mother". She gets an unexpected promotion at work and can't do it AND take care of a child so she wants a late term abortion, forcing her to hinder her career would be psychologically damaging to her mental health.
or she's 2 weeks from giving birth, even 1 day from giving birth and discovers her husband is cheating on her, the way Bill Clinton cheated on Hillary. She is full of rage and wants to punish her husband by killing their child. Not doing so would cause her mental distress.....remember in the Godfather how Michael Corleone's wife had an abortion and told him she had killed his child out of spite and anger.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
