Girl, 14, Sues Family to Stop Abortion

[The Straight Story]

Girl, 14, Sues Family to Stop Abortion

(CN) - A state court in Corpus Christi, Texas, extended an order preventing a 14-year-old girl's family from forcing her to get an abortion.

The girl filed a temporary restraining order against her family on Dec. 21 after they scheduled an appointment for her to get an abortion, according to the Corpus Christi Caller-Times.

She is represented by attorneys with the Texas Center for Defense of Life, an Austin-based nonprofit.

Stephen Casey, chief counsel for the group, told the Caller Times that "she has the people she's relied on her whole life pushing her in the direction she doesn't want to go."

...

The Caller-Times reported that three of the girl's family members who attended the hearing last week told the judge they did not have an attorney to represent them. One of her cousins described the teen as mentally unstable and said she was not capable of making the decision to keep her baby, according to the Caller-Times.

http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/01/09/42861.htm

[salvorhardin]

1. That's a tough one

A woman's right to choose, is a woman's right to choose, and if we support choice for other minors, with or without parental notification, then we should also support this young woman's right to carry her baby to term. On the other hand, she's 14 years old, and her parents are going to bear the financial burden of her pregnancy, and possibly raising the kid if she doesn't elect for adoption. And if she actually is mentally unstable, then that's a whole other can of worms. I feel sorry for her and her family.

[Vincardog]

2. I am not sure that a challenged 14 year old is a "woman" I am glad I am not the judge

Last edited Mon Jan 9, 2012, 01:47 PM - Edit history (1)

[MedicalAdmin]

18. Legally she is a minor and has limited rights.

I think emancipation is the only route she can go, but my guess is that she will get her wish and the parents will get to raise the kids kid.


A thought occurs to me - who is the father?

[Vincardog]

21. Let's hope it is not the grandfather to be

[MedicalAdmin]

56. OR anyone over the age of 18 for that matter...

This is one long shit fest of a story...

[itsrobert]

107. She could run out the clock

Isn't there a limit on how far along you are to get an abortion?

I am sure the pro-life crowd backer her would do just that. She does have pro-lifers backing her?

[MedicalAdmin]

158. That's what I thought too.

Her "backers" are only using her for there own ends. I feel real bad for this kid. Heck of a thing to have to deal with at age 14, assuming she is actually dealing with it. I would like to know more about this story.

Have you ever seen the movie Citizen Ruth?

[joeglow3]

173. Not an angle I would take

Norma McCorvey (aka Jane Roe) was quoted as saying she "had been the "pawn" of two young and ambitious lawyers (Weddington and Coffee) who were looking for a plaintiff with whom they could challenge the Texas state law prohibiting abortion." Sadly, people on both sides can be more interested in their cause than the individual people involved.

[MedicalAdmin]

178. Exactly.

People are not ping pong balls. They shouldn't be treated as such.

I think you and I have a bit of disgust and distrust of those with self involved agendas. I'm sure that girl has nothing around her but those seeking to use her.

[joeglow3]

179. Agreed.

And I agree that Citizen Ruth is a great movie. I live in Omaha and graduated from the same high school as Alexander Payne.

[snooper2]

3. Well she can get herself emancipated and go on her own...

Is the only fix to this I can see...

Or she has to get other gaurdians if nothing else and keep her child as a child...

[Snake Alchemist]

13. I have been told on other topics that a 14 year old cannot be held responsible for their actions.

Do to their undeveloped brains.

[LanternWaste]

76. I would guess that the vast majority of people who say that...

I would guess that the vast majority of people who say that relies on the context within the particular theme and substance of a conversation...

We see what we want to see as often as we hear what we want to hear-- more often than not, our wants a little more than having our own opinions validated.

[dsc]

113. the fact is go to any of the threads about Lawrence King

and his murderer and you would have seen a whole bunch of a 14 year old can't be held responsible.

[Charlemagne]

87. Well, you see,

if it is something that we disagree with, then the 14 year old should be regarded as a child and has no say.

However, if it is something that we like, then the 14 year old is regarded as a mature young person with all the rights and privileges pertaining thereto.

[Warpy]

19. I can see no happy outcome here

The girl wants to keep this pregnancy and she should be allowed to, no question. However, we do know what's down the road for her in terms of diminished expectations and it's sad.

It's not as sad as having her parents force an abortion on her when she doesn't want it. That's the way to destroy all trust in her parents and quite possibly supply other scars, as well. Plus, it won't work. She will get pregnant again ASAP and this time, not tell anyone until she's past that three month mark.

14 is young, but it's not unthinkable the way 11 is.

[salvorhardin]

34. That's the road my thoughts were going down

It's unwinnable. And she's gotten sucked into the clutches of some anti-choice group too, no doubt presenting a constant barrage of propaganda and "caring" reinforcement.

[Warpy]

45. I have a cousin who was shoved into a shotgun marriage at 15

and had her second child at 16. The marriage didn't last, of course, but she's been working her whole life to overcome what being such a young mother did to her: GED, community college, state university. It's possible but if I try to say it had been easy for her, she'd make me go out and cut my own switch.

[MattBaggins]

62. If it is "Crisis Pregnancy Centers" they will coddle her

until the baby is born. They will then sell the baby off and dump the girl in the street.

It is a pity that such a situation exists but I can only see erring on the side of the girl. It is just not even fathomable to start forcing abortions on women.

[musette_sf]

105. And after they traffic the baby

they will relentlessly guilt her and brainwash her into self-loathing, and get a new lifetime customer for their phony baloney "post-abortive trauma survivor services" group.

So, to recap, they'll brainwash her (already have) into keeping a pregnancy that would have better been terminated, for everyone concerned; they''ll steal the baby when the baby is born, and sell it to the highest bidder via the usual human trafficking criminals (aka the "adoption" mills); then, they'll brainwash her into feeling guilty about it all, because without sufficient victim-blaming, she just might go forward to live a good life for herself without patriarchal misogynistic "approval".

[barbtries]

58. so do i.

it is a toughie. i tend to believe that an abortion is probably the best route here. but to make her undergo that against her will, i don't think i can go that far.

[Arkansas Granny]

112. It is a cousin that claims she is mentally unstable. I don't see in the linked article that a

professional has made that call.

[uppityperson]

142. Is it the same cousin that grabbed her neck, hit her face, threatened to beat her if she aborted?

Makes me wonder who the father is, why an abusive cousin would have his opinion taken seriously. Also what does "mentally unstable" mean?

[Arkansas Granny]

155. I didn't see enough info in the article to know for sure if it was the same cousin or not.

It doesn't really matter. It would take an unbiased profession to make that determination, IMO. Like you , I don't know what "mentally unstable" means. I think the article was written to push buttons, not relate facts. I feel sorry for this young woman as it seems she is being used by the very people who claim to be helping her.

[uppityperson]

156. yup. Had a friend run across some of those foul people.

she ended up getting an abortion about 16 weeks, said it was the turning point for her, has fought against "abortion help centers" since since.

Seems like this girl is being used also.

[Lance_Boyle]

4. As long as her family can legally disown her and any financial obligation to her, let her choose.

If her choice can legally stick her family with an unwanted burden then they should have a say, too.

[FedUpWithIt All]

14. Would you say the same if this was a teen being forced to continue a pregnancy? n/t

[Lance_Boyle]

41. The same would not apply, because the only burden imposed on the family on that case

would be the cost of the abortion.

[Snake Alchemist]

15. The burden will then likely go to the State. nt

[Lance_Boyle]

42. It *ought* to go to the 'choose life' group making her case

but it won't.

[Snake Alchemist]

46. This case is going to bring up a lot of issues.

I'm curious if the father is capable of contributing to the child's care and if the mother and father cannot support the child can the grandparents legally divest themselves from their child and grandchild.

[ehrnst]

39. I think that the issue of custody of a child that is born would be another issue

if the burden you are talking about is the support of the infant. I'm no lawyer, but making the case that she's not competent to raise the child would not be so controversial. I believe that the family may be within their rights to put the infant up for adoption, if a family member does not want to raise the child.

And they certainly cannot abandon the daughter without making arrangements for her care.

No, I don't think that the daughter should be made to legally choose between her parents and having a baby, anymore than she should be forced to choose between her parents and an abortion - which is what parental consent laws try in part to do.

[MattBaggins]

63. Thankfully. our court sysem tells Pontius Pilates to piss off.

The courts will decide what is in the best interest of the child and people who want to cry rivers of tears about "it's not fair to make me be involved" will have to suck it up and carry on.

[leftyohiolib]

68. a child is an "unwanted burden" wow, that's cold blooded

[lapislzi]

82. Oh? Says who?

A burden is on the back of the burdened.

I, for one, would adamantly refuse to raise a grandchild should my teenage daughter become pregnant.

That's what choice is all about. If my kid chooses to bear a child, she must bear responsibility for that choice.

I love my daughter, but that doesn't mean I want to raise her baby. And she knows that.

[kiranon]

120. Some child/women cannot take care of their children nor themselves. It's a tragedy for all.

We are raising the 2nd of 3 children of a child/woman who did not believe in abortion but had no ability to raise any of her children. She barely can take care of herself. She also passed onto 2 of the 3 children a genetic condition that has no cure and causes a life of heartache. She would have had more children but couldn't physically as 3 pregnancies so close together caused damage to her that could not be corrected. No amount of talking to her about birth control had any effect. Perhaps she was not capable of understanding what it all meant. What to do with children who are minimally intelligent and vulnerable to someone taking advantage of them, I don't know.

[leftyohiolib]

130. rationalize away if that makes you feel better but i stand by my statement

it's a cold blooded statement from a cold heart

[Scout]

133. fine, take your warm heart and YOU raise all the unwanted children of other people

jesus h christ on a fucking pogo stick.

[LanternWaste]

77. Odd things about unwanted burdens...

Odd things about unwanted burdens is that they quite often become joyful members of an extended family.

But then again, I imagine our own biases compel us perceive a thing only one way, and it can be a struggle to see additional options.

[ehrnst]

88. And sometimes they become abused and neglected.

We don't force childrearing on anyone, for exactly that reason. No one is forced by law to raise a child. One must make the proper arrangements and not abandon the child, but, even a society that will force childbearing on an unwilling woman sees the danger in assuming that forcing parenthood on someone is a danger to the child.

Yes, most women that carry an unplanned pregnancy to term keep the infant - she's not an incubator, and a bond will more often than not come to pass - even if the person is grossly unfit to be a parent.

I have seen disastrous results in my own family when a 14 year old wanted an abortion, was refused, then alternately abused and negelect the child. People said, "Oh the maternal instinct will take over, and we can't just let her get out of the responsibility. She played, she pays."

[LanternWaste]

93. Sometimes A, sometimes B...

Sometimes A, sometimes B... My only point being that our own personal biases and perspectives may quite often prevent us from allowing additional perspectives.

As an aside, I'm happy that I was able to become a member of a joyous family despite originally being labeled by more than one as an unwanted burden (again, our own biases and all...)

[ehrnst]

99. I'm glad it worked out for you.

My mom's dad was a drunk and a deadbeat, and she was able to become a joyous person.

I wouldn't recommend choosing to have a child with a drunk deadbeat, however.

[treestar]

106. Those two sets of laws aren't related

Who is liable to support the child would be the subject of another law. The parents are still liable to support her as a minor, though.

State laws may apply regarding the child of a minor - maybe the minor parent is eligible for some government aid.

[no_hypocrisy]

5. "Mentally unstable"

If I were the judge, I'd want at least two independent professional psychological/psychiatric studies done on this girl. During adolescence, you have hormone surges, a desire for independence that can be mistaken as oppositional defiant disorder, etc. And you have parents who are motivated to say and do anything to get this abortion processed.

I'm prochoice as the ultimate decision belongs to this girl. I'd support her if SHE wanted to abortion and her parents wanted her to bear the child. (I'm appalled at our country's history of sterilizing girls her age by the courts designating them as "enfeebled".)

[ehrnst]

9. The issue will indeed come down to competency.

And studies have shown that minors who make the decision to carry a pregnancy are often less mature and realistic about their life options than those who choose to terminate a pregnancy.

However, anti-choice groups say the opposite is true.

Either way, I would not want to be the judge here.

If nothing else, the girl can be determined not competent to be a parent. The evaluations would have to be done quickly, due to the nature of the case.

I wonder how easy it would have been to get a lawyer in Texas to take her case if she had been suing to get an abortion against her parents wishes - most laws restricting access to abortion for minors require a judge to make a decision regarding competency in order for the minor to bypass parental consent.

[Zalatix]

11. I'll be the judge here. It's her choice. Okthxbai!

[ehrnst]

80. I agree - and in reality, no one will give her an abortion

if she's not willing. This is about how a judge will rule.

As I stated in another thread -this is a legal and academic exercise in how the judge will determine competency - especially in a state that is very willing to say a teen that wants an abortion is incompetent to make that decision (as shown by it's laws that apply to abortion, and not childbirth).

This will be interesting in terms of how competency weighs in - and to see how a Republican judge will justify
"choice" in an anti-choice state.

The issues of the health of a 14 year old during a pregnancy is another matter - and full term childbearing is far more dangerous than abortion.

[loyalsister]

75. This is the flip side argument I have used against parental notification laws

I think that it is her choice.

[ehrnst]

81. And this Republican judge will have to use all the Pro-choice arguments

about teens being competent to make decisions about their own bodies in this ruling.

Childbearing is far more dangerous than abortion for a 14 year old, and a judge will have to take that into account prior to ruling.

I am pro-choice, and I am also someone that personally feels that childbearing and childrearing are devalued most by those that claim to be "pro-life" - they see it as a default, not a choice.

I would like to see how they get around the use of the word Choice, which they hate. I imagine they will hijack the rhetoric of the Pro-choice movement to make it look like false equivalency.

And, as I've stated before - this is all moot. There is no abortion provider in the country that would force her to have an abortion, unless she was unconscious and bleeding to death from her uterus - and that would be in an emergency room.

There is no such thing as forced abortion on the part of a legal abortion provider in this country. The fact that these lawyers are getting so many people to debate as though it was is a victory for them.

[Arkansas Granny]

114. What I got from the linked article, it was a cousin who described her as mentally unstable.

It doesn't state that any professional has given an opinion.

[joeybee12]

6. Do you think the lawyers representing her would represent a 14-year-old

who wanted to have an abortion against her family's wishes? I mean, clearly the lawyers agree that a 14-year-old is capable of making her own decisions.

[Lance_Boyle]

7. Her lawyers are from a right-to-life group, so no, they would not represent her

if she wanted to have an abortion. They would claim she was a robot from Mars if it meant positive publicity for the "choose life" movement.

[joeybee12]

8. I should have added this...

Of course they wouldn't!

[Zalatix]

12. It's ridiculous that anti-choicers are being picked to protect a girl's freedom of choice.

Once again hypocrisy profits from both sides of the aisle.

[ehrnst]

17. They are anti-choice lawyers with an agenda against abortion, not pro-'choice'

They would say consider her incompetent if she wanted an abortion against her parents wishes.

[Zalatix]

183. Well, what can you say? Where are the pro-choicers to have her back?

The issue here is her choice. It's maddeningly ironic that the anti-choicers are defending her choice (even if it suits their own agenda).

[img][/img]

[Raffi Ella]

26. Well, and that's another sad part of this-

She's being used as a pawn for right to life groups. But still, her choice.

[Hippo_Tron]

168. No, but maybe it would've been nice if the ACLU had gotten there first...

[RandySF]

10. I support her.

If we support her choice to terminate a pregnancy, we should support her right to not terminate it. It seems like people on our side are prone to compel someone to have an abortion and that's hypocrisy.

[Wait Wut]

22. I agree with your statement, but...

...I'm not ready to say I support her decision. She's still a 14 year old girl. Her health, the babies health, the responsibility, are all things that need to be taken into consideration. I'm not saying that she should be "forced" to have an abortion. She needs guidance and counseling from a neutral agent. Not someone who is going to tell her that God will either reward or punish her.

My opinion would be the same if the arguments were reversed, btw. This is a bad situation from any direction.

[RandySF]

30. If bodily harm was the issue, I would agree.

But all we have right now is the parents' word that she's 'unstable'. That's the kind of thing that used to lead to forced sterilization.

[Wait Wut]

53. Yeah, I'm just going to ignore the parent's idiotic claims.

But, I'm not going to discount their concern for their 14 year old daughter. They've already done enough damage, apparently. Calling her "unstable" isn't going to mend any family scars. I went through all that as a teenager, so did my sister.

I'm more concerned with her health than anything else. Granted, there are 14 year olds that are fully developed, but without a doctor's input, I'm going to guess that physical appearances don't necessarily mean physical readiness. I had my son just after my 18th birthday and I almost died. I could never have anymore children.

This girl needs a trustworthy, non-judgmental advocate. She's been turned into a pawn and that's not going to help her no matter what the outcome.

[ehrnst]

89. The judge has assigned an attorney to her

according to the article. Hopefully, a truly impartial one trained in family court matters.

[Wait Wut]

51. Yes.

Whichever her choice is. She's 14. Where do we start to draw the line? Is 12 old enough to make this type of decision? 10? Right now, she's already being counseled by people with their own agenda. I'm suggesting she receive counseling that will inform her of the possible risks to her still developing body, her future, her mental health, her education, etc. for ANY decision she makes. Not that she be steered in any one particular direction. Just so that she can make as informed a choice as is possible for a 14 year old girl.

No, she should not be "forced" into any decision.

[Wait Wut]

65. I agree with you on parental consent.

But, the lack of parental consent requirements does not mean the girl cannot receive counseling. I had a horrible relationship with my parents and waited until I was 8 months pregnant to tell them (I had been on my own since 16). At that point, I didn't care what they thought. I also didn't receive any counseling, which could have helped me through some difficult times. I knew I would keep my child, but when I went to the doctor, he handed me a "prescription" and said, "Here. Just give them this when you go to the clinic for your abortion".

I was 17 and couldn't respond. I just took that damned piece of paper and walked out. The emotional strain on me was horrible. I immediately assumed I was making a terrible decision and that I was "expected" to get an abortion because it was the "smartest" choice. Counseling would have been freakin' awesome. Not to change my mind, but to give me the information I needed to understand the consequences of my decision so that I could be better prepared.

Again, counseling isn't necessarily intended to change a person's mind but to help them cope with the decision they've made. She's going to need it...for a long time...no matter what happens.

[ehrnst]

24. Girls must prove competency to get an abortion against their parent's wishes in TX.

I support the right of competent persons to make decisions about their bodies - and I will always come down on the side of choice in the event that competency is not quantifiable.

"Robert Blum and Michael Resnick have reported that adolescents who choose abortion have a better ability to conceptualize the future, a greater feeling of control over life, less anxiety and a less traditional view of female sex roles than do those
who decide on childbirth." http://www.dennisrichardson.org/m43/m43study.pdf

I don't know which is a more violent to do to someone - force them to give birth, or forcing them to have an abortion.

It's Texas, which has an anti-abortion agenda, so I'm betting it's much, much easier for a girl to defy her parents and have a baby than it is to defy her parents and not give birth.

[ehrnst]

28. There is also her health to consider - by definition, it's a high risk pregnancy.

Her fetus will compete with the mother's growing body for many things she will need. And depending on her physical stature and maturity, full term pregnancy may be detremental to her health.

[KansDem]

31. She's 14 and a minor

She cannot sign contracts. She cannot drive an automobile. She cannot drink alcohol or consume tabacco products.

I suppose the question should be asked: "Is a 14 year-old capable of making a decision like this one?" Or should medical decisions involving 14 year-olds be made by the parents or legal guardian?

[Moonwalk]

67. No, she can't sign contracts, drive, drink, but....

I'm really afraid those don't count. They don't count because those can be created by a culture. We can and do artificially decide when someone is a legal adult--when they can marry, vote, drink. In Britain the age when one is an adult and can drink, etc. is 16. In the past, kids young as 10 could drive. We set the line artificially and it can change. We changed the age to vote from 21 to 18.

But what we CANNOT change, however, is when a girl's body is going to be at a stage where she can get pregnant. Until we can, then a different set of "laws" is required for pregnancy and abortions. Because the 14 year old--or 12 year old--is having a decision made not about whether they will drive a car or sign a contract, but whether something will be done to their body. And that really must be their decision even if they're deemed, artificially by us, as too young for other things.

This is her body, her decision, and her age is IMHO, immaterial. Having the baby is--let's face it--what her body is old enough to naturally do. If she's not so young that she's likely to die of this, then let her have the baby.

Of course, letting her keep the baby is a whole other argument. In that instance, she can be judged competent or not competent enough to be a parent. That argument becomes about the baby's welfare, not hers, and so she hasn't the say in it that she had about the pregnancy/abortion.

[Tsiyu]

180. Fantastic post n/t

[ehrnst]

84. Those have been established to be different from reproductive decisions

"Summaries of well-designed research conclude that most minors 14 to 17 years of age are as competent as adults to provide consent to abortion. They are able to understand the risks and benefits of options and to make voluntary, rational, independent
decisions.”

- http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/pediatrics;97/5/746.pdf

[Charlemagne]

90. ehhh I dont know

I like the idea of it being a choice and not having a court mandating you receive an abortion. It seems so draconian.

[LanternWaste]

78. Supporting the individual's right to choose is not predicated on our own personal opinions...

Supporting the individual's right to choose is not predicated on our own personal opinions of whether the choice was correct of not... they appear to be two separate concepts.

[Wait Wut]

16. Too many variables to make a decision.

At 14 I thought I was adult enough to make some lifelong choices. I wasn't. She needs counseling, some good medical advice and a support system (not just financial). By the time this all plays out, she'll be having this baby. Then it becomes a matter of whether or not she's capable of being a mother or if she should give it up.

This is a serious mess that is being used as a tool by the pro-forced motherhood crowd. Sickening. She's a child and needs help, not some self-righteous religious zealots telling her that God will provide. He won't. And, they won't, either. Once that baby is born, they'll be on the side that wants to take away her babies right to eat, get an education and live in a heated home with a damned refrigerator.

[moriah]

20. Forced abortion is just as disgusting as forced pregnancy.

If they think she's incompetent to be a parent, well, DHS will step in. Obviously the case has been brought to their attention.

[Raffi Ella]

29. yes,

exactly.

[FedUpWithIt All]

50. Agree completely. n/t

[Charlemagne]

91. yes

thank you

[ehrnst]

159. At 14, without family support - she won't be able to parent that baby.

In any case - forced abortion is not going to happen. Abortion providers would not proceed once she declines consent.

This situation is about the judge trying to stop her family from coercing her - which wouldn't even be an issue if she wanted an abortion against their will.

[moriah]

162. A choice not to abort is not the same as a choice to parent. And there is the baby daddy.

But believe it or not, and as much as I hate to trump a pro-life meme, coercive abortion does happen. In reality, no decision to abort is ever one that would be chosen outside of other circumstances making the decision likely. No one deliberately gets pregnant just because they get a wild hair up their ass to conceive and then kill a baby.

There's a lot of parallels to rape for me in this. And that's part of the reason I'm reacting so strongly here.

Physically grappling with your victim, forcing their legs open against their muscle resistance, and shoving something inside them is rape. Is it any less rape when a husband, who is the only support system for their wife with multiple kids, says "I'm going to kick you out if you don't have sex with me?"

You keep saying that it's not a forced abortion unless they tie you to the damn table or something, and that's not accurate.

[ehrnst]

169. That's how others here seem to be defining 'forced abortion.' Let me clarify:

There are those that will attempt to 'coerce' abortion, which is what the judge is actually dealing with.

The antis, by using the term "forced abortion" are deliberately trying to create the impression that indeed, abortion providers will perform an abortion on someone that says no. Those here seem to think that parents are the ones who will be giving the go ahead, and not the girl, for the procedure - that somehow it can indeed happen if she doesn't consent. The anti's are drawing parallels with rape, acting like they are for a 'choice' but they would try their hardest to inflict coerced childbearing her if she didn't want to have a baby.

Coerced abortion possible - but far, far less likely to ever happen than coerced sex, which is indeed rape.

Why? - Ethics aside, abortion providers have a LOT to lose by going ahead with a procedure on someone that they think has DOUBTS about having one. There are lawyers that make a living getting women to sue abortion providers after the fact for "not telling them they were killing a baby," etc. They will err on the side of turning someone who is hesitant away rather than performing a coerced abortion.

Clinics specifically ask patients if they are being pressured to have an abortion, if they have doubts, etc. They are trained to spot this. It would be INCREDIBLY difficult for a 14 year old who is against having an abortion to convince a trained counselor who would be looking for any signs of coercion. While 'possible' - incredibly unlikely. People here seem to think that there is a good possibility that this 14 year old would somehow, some way, be on a table getting one, if the judge said your parents know best.

The judge has not put a restraining order on a clinic - the judge has put a restraining order on the parents TALKING to her about it until the court appointed attorney to the girl can sort out what she actually wants - without the anti-choice lawyers agenda, or her family.

I understand that rape can be rape even if there is not grappling, or physical threats. But - this is not the case with abortion providers. They actively try TURN AWAY women & girls who have doubts.

Yes, I will make a distinction between coerced abortion and 'forced abortion' AS IT IS BEING DISCUSSED and defined here on this board.

I would not make that distinction in rape, which has a different dynamic - in that the inflictor has a motivation to inflict and coerce. Rapists deliberately ignore the protestations or emotional response of the victim. That is what makes it rape.

Obstetricians who provide abortions do not get 'pleasure' or a sense of power over women from providing abortions, nor do they do it because they "like" abortion. This makes them profoundly different than rapists, and removes what would impel them to 'force' an abortion on someone.

Does that clarify my statements for you?

[moriah]

171. And no one is taking the provider to court -- but the parents.

I see rape from the standpoint of the victim, not the perp, so whatever they're thinking really isn't part of my picture in this -- the emotional/psychological reasons why a rapist does what they do is irrelevant. They could be completely innocent and truly well-meaning or completely unable to control their actions, wouldn't matter....

.... still doesn't change the fact that I didn't want them doing what they did.

I see forced pregnancy and forced abortion -- or if you prefer, coerced pregnancy and coerced abortion, even though it *is* a semantics game -- both as bad as rape. Because all three are abrogations of a person's right to choose what happens to their own body. And in the case of forced pregnancy, the invader/rapist is something that's completely incapable of making decisions at all -- a zygote. It's pretty tiny and powerless and has no nervous system. Still doesn't mean the fact it's innocent means it should be able to live in my body if I don't want it to.

My body. My choice.

Even when I was 14.

Even when I was 10.

--------

I had dropped this discussion, you responded to my extremely philosophical response nearly 24 hours after I wrote it. I was talking generalities, you're trying to draw this into specifics. I am sorry if I bit your head off, but you were looking for an argument and got one and got me started.

[ehrnst]

172. I think that we agree on most things - except what is being presented in this discussion.

Yes she's a victim - but of what, actually? Bullying by her family, perhaps - depending on what is the facts are in this case. I get fed up with Antis framing the discussion with inflammatory language that paints an innaccurate picture of women or the physicians that are brave enough to perform legal abortions. I think that "forced abortion" is up there with "killing an unborn child" and "feticide" in devolving a discussion on reproductive rights in this country.

I would NEVER advocate that a 14 year old who is capable of giving consent (not in a coma, not mentally disabled, etc) be forced into any childbearing option. I am concerned that she may not be realistic about her options, the impact of a full term pregnancy on her health and her future. The impact of a full term pregnancy is indeed greater than the impact of an abortion on a child - and I can just imagine parents going ballistic over the situation, and attempting to gain control over things that they don't have, giving her the "I know what's best for you" ultimatums, and everything blowing up into this.

Unfortunately for that girl, I don't know that she'll trust anyone enough to open up about why she thinks that having a baby is the best choice for her, and get all the facts and support she needs to make a decision that supports her plans and dreams -or listen to anyone now that she has these scum lawyers with their 'childbirth at any cost' agenda. That's what's actually being forced on her, isolation in her time of need. I blame her parents, I blame her scum lawyers. Aparently she's living with the family of the father of her child. This is precisely why some kids do not involve their parents in these decisions. Allegedly, her older sister had a baby at 16 and was 'forced to give it up for adoption.'

BTW - I was seeking to clarify what is and is not legal, possible or realistic in discussions of "forced abortion" that were being posted. I was not 'asking for an argument,' but I appreciate intelligent counter-arguments, rather than accusations of baiting, or word games.

And I only check in here every so often - sorry for the delayed response, but I had not read every post before I responded - and this is a huge discussion.

[moriah]

177. my post was #20. ;) It'd been here awhile and you'd been pretty active on the thread after.

It really seemed like you were trying to bring the thread back from the dead, and my opinions are pretty set.

I guess I'm what you'd call a "radical choicer". And I was talking from an ethical/idealist viewpoint about rights and wrongs, not as much specific situations. There *is* coercion in so many cases before a person gets to the clinic, and if a woman's been beat down enough psychologically by everyone around them before they finally get in the car and go to the clinic, the provider might not know it wasn't truly consensual. As much as I hated to say it, it does happen. And it is wrong.

It's just as wrong as badgering people with sonograms and pictures of aborted fetuses and cute cuddly babies to make them nurture an invading zygote against their will.

I'd trashcanned this thread because it's pretty inflammatory and I don't need the extra blood pressure rise. We are both pro-choice. Have a great day!

[Raffi Ella]

23. It's not a hard case at all-

Her body, her choice.

I'd have liked to see someone try to stop me when I wanted/recieved an abortion... She's young but it's her body and NOBODY can tell her to abort a fetus from her body if she doesn't want to, no matter how unstable she may or may not be.

[MineralMan]

27. It's interesting to have pro-life attorneys representing

the girl who is demanding choice. Very complicated philosophically, and legally, too. I don't envy this judge one bit. Either way, there will be massive criticism of the decision. For me, though, the question of forcing an abortion is the central one. I wouldn't force an abortion on anyone. I suspect that will end up being the decision - to not force an abortion on a teenager.

[ehrnst]

175. Neither parent nor judge can force a clinic to perform an abortion on her - no clinic would do that.

Clinics will respect her choice, so there's really no danger of forced abortion. The likelihood of her getting an abortion if she doesn't want one is nil. This case is about publicity, and the headline is misleading.

If the girl had actually gone to that appointment her parents made - the clinic staff would question her alone, and ask if this was her decision, or if she was being pressured. And they would not perform one on her once they saw what was up.

If she was in a coma, or mentally disabled, that might be a different issue - especially if she had been raped. Then she would be unable to give consent.

As I said before - if there is one thing in this country that a teenager can do legally without parental consent or knowledge is give birth.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

122. Would you say the same if she was e.g a 9-year-old refusing life-saving cancer surgery?

Women (and men) should have the right to control their own bodies; I'm not convinced children should.

That said, I think 14 is old enough. But I don't agree that "it's not a hard case at all".

[Raffi Ella]

136. ok, so...

You've made a declarative statement about children making decisions for themselves that ended with this girl is old enough, so...? Obviously you don't think this is a hard case either.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

138. "Think" as opposed to "am totally certain of".

I don't see this case as having anything to do with abortion rights for adults; it's about deciding how old someone has to be before they are allowed to take responsibility for their own decisions, rather than having either their parents or the state make those decisions for them.

For some of those decisions 14 probably isn't old enough - we don't let 14-year-olds drive or vote or buy alcohol, for example - but I think that for deciding not to have an abortion 14 is old enough, *provided* we're talking about a developmentally normal 14-year-old rather than a mentally handicapped one (which we appear to be, but it's hinted that we may not be). But it's not a call I'd make without worrying about it.

[Raffi Ella]

141. Frankly,

seeing as how No Dr. would ever perform an abortion on an unwilling patient? I don't see how your feelings about this matter.

I'm glad the law is on our side on this issue. You don't get a say in this 14 year olds decision or any other woman's.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

160. A 14 year old is *not* a woman.

My "feelings" are relevant in that I have a vote, and one of the things that I would vote for is *not* letting children, including 14-year-olds, make all their own decisions.

To reiterate/clarify what I said earlier: in my view, this is nothing to do with women's rights. It's about children's rights, which I think in many ways should be strictly limited. I don't think this is one of them, but it's not as black-and-white an issue as you think, I think.

I think your claim that no doctor would perform an abortion on an unwilling patient is probably mistaken. I'm sure that no doctor would perform an abortion on an unwilling mentally sound adult; I'm fairly sure that many *would* perform abortions on children even if the child didn't want it.

[Raffi Ella]

161. I'm not interested in this

manufactured drama; to debate it is to give it credence.

Lest anyone think otherwise let me reiterate, No Dr. would perform an abortion against a patients will.

[MineralMan]

25. Now there's a case that brings a lot of questions to the table.

Clearly, I don't know enough of the details to opine on it very much. It does raise the question of whether "choice" works in both directions, for sure. As such, it will be a much discussed case. And having a pro-life group's lawyers on the girl's side raised even more questions.

A relative saying she is mentally unstable is not usable evidence, though. The relatives are biased. The attorneys for the girl are biased. This one's not going to be easy or go well, I think.

[ehrnst]

33. I'm not sure that there would be an abortion provider anywhere

but *especially in TX* - due to the hostility that abortion providers face there - that would perform an abortion against her will, in any case.

Maybe a private physician ala Michael Jackson's, but this family doesn't even have a lawyer to represent them.

[Raffi Ella]

38. ah! Good point!

Very good point. oh, this is an interesting case indeed.

[ehrnst]

48. It may be all about the publicity - with no substance

It's like the so-called "partial birth abortion ban" - a solution looking for a problem.

I wonder if she would even get past an interview with an impartial lawyer. They would likely tell her that her parents can make all the appointments they want, but it won't mean anything because once she gets there, they won't perform one if she's unwilling.

Parents "pushing her in a direction she doesn't want to go" is not something you can get a restraining order for. But if these lawyers can make the public believe that she can be strapped down to a table, kicking and screaming, and an abortion provider will just perform one, then they've done what they're paid to do.

It will be very interesting to see what the judge says - I'd be interested to see the judges' history on rulings about abortion consent cases - if there is one. My understanding is that many anti-choice judges never, ever grant a waiver for parental consent for abortion. If this judge has ruled in the past for parent, that would be relevant.

[Raffi Ella]

55. Brilliant evaluation of the situation-

This so called right to life group may end up proving "Choice" in a way that We haven't been able to yet.

[loyalsister]

79. Or

Negative consequences of requiring parental involvement. It cuts both ways. No women should be required to involve people they feel would not be helpful in her decision about her pregnancy.

[ehrnst]

131. Yes, apparently that's exactly what they're doing

Claiming that forced abortion is legal in the US, and this girl is being used to further their message:

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/texas-teen-spared-forced-abortion-for-two-weeks

Lifesite news claims that the FACE act somehow makes it "legal" for a happily pregnant woman having a routine exam to be strapped down and given an abortion, simply because the OB thinks that it's endangering her health.

[moriah]

52. I would hope that NO one who supported choice would ever force the decision, ANYWHERE.

It's not like when I was 10 and didn't want them to give me an IV before getting my tonsils removed and them tricking me by distracting me and putting the IV in my ankle.

[Charlemagne]

92. The point is moot anyway

By the time they have the trial and the appeals and all that stuff that goes with it, she will have already given birth.

[Warren DeMontague]

35. I'm pro choice. Period.

that sums up my feelings about this.

[meegbear]

36. "Casey said the teen has the right to make the decision herself, no matter what her age." ...

unless she wanted the abortion, then she's a minor incapable of making an informed decision.

[krispos42]

37. Can the parents force her to go through with this if there are no health issues for the mother?

I understand that the parents have guardianship, and thus can agree or disagree to have medical procedures done. But there must be a limit, right?


For example, could the parents force their daughter to get, say, breast implants? Or have an IUD installed? Or her tubes tied? Or her stomach stapled, assuming she wasn't an unhealthy weight?


This is a really difficult one.

[moriah]

47. My little sister, who is mentally challenged, cannot be forced to have her tubes tied.

She's an adult with a guardianship on her, and the only thing they can force on her in North Carolina is Depo-Provera. Since it's reversible.

It's never an easy decision to make, to continue or abort a pregnancy. My gut-reaction when I learned I was pregnant after date-rape was "Oh my god, no, get this thing OUT of me!" If I'd been forced to go against that gut reaction it would have been horribly psychologically traumatic.

When someone's instant gut reaction to the suggestion of having an abortion is "No! That's part of me!" -- which happens even in cases of rape -- forcing them to go against that gut reaction is just as sickening.

[ehrnst]

49. Any minor can have a childbirth procedure without parental consent.

But not an abortion, which is much less risky.

[Marrah_G]

57. My former sister-inlaw- 20 years younger is mentally ill

She has been this way all her life and has spent much of her time in special schools. My other former sister-in-law has guardianship of her and brings her for a birth control shot every few months. The girl lives on her own ( with help) and is trying very hard to be allowed to get married (to a young man with developmental issues.). Neither one could every take care of a child.

[fifthoffive]

61. Unlikely

I doubt you could find a competent doctor who would do those things, so there would be a different legal argument there, I presume.

[treestar]

104. I would think not

The doctor wouldn't do it, knowing there was a lawsuit - a doctor would not normally be forcing any patient to do anything. Maybe infants, but they officially don't protest their medical treatment. But a 14 year old saying they don't want it done, who would have to be physically restrained? No respectable doctor would touch that.

The courts can't order her to have it, either. They can order her to be allowed to have it without parental consent in states with those laws. But no court has power to order her to undergo the abortion.

All of those procedures you mention would apply to. They need the parent's consent because the minor's isn't good enough. But the reverse wouldn't be true.

[LeftinOH]

40. It's her call. And btw.. who raped her? The cousin?

At 14 years of age, "rape" is probably the appropriate term for what happened to her.

[uppityperson]

144. Seriously. Those were my thoughts also. The cousin who assaulted her, or the one claiming mentally

unstable? Or are they perhaps the same cousin?

Sounds like she has a dandy family, hope she gets the help she needs.

[Jennicut]

43. My cousin had an abortion at 15 but it was her choice.

At 14 I think you are old enough to make the decision if you want to have an abortion or not.
To be considered mentally unstable she would need to be committed by her family to a psych ward at a hospital. I have been on a psych ward and I have a degree in psychology. I have worked a few places with real mentally unstable patients and worked with children with mental health issues. To be considered legally mentally insane you need to have severe psychosis, schizophrenia, severe bi polar disorder etc. If she just has slight depression or is simply a wayward teen who has made bad mistakes then she is more then capable of making this decision.
Forcing an abortion (like forcing someone to carry a pregnancy they don't want) is icky.

[HockeyMom]

44. Logically choice has to work both ways

HOWEVER, if she is allowed the choice of having this baby against her parents wishes, those parents should not be forced to financially support and raise this child. The girl, and whoever is the father, can support it, or it can be put up for adoption.

[Kdillard]

163. I agree completely.

[Nye Bevan]

54. I respect her right to choose.

Strapping her down, forcibly anesthetizing her and aborting her fetus against her wishes would be abhorrent to me.

[fifthoffive]

59. What if this were some other medical procedure?

Say the girl refused to undergo treatment for pneumonia because she was being influenced by a group that believes such treatments are against their religion? Would her parents have the right to force the girl to undergo the treatments? I don't know, but I suspect the answer is yes.

I understand that there are people with moral objections to abortions, but where do we draw the line? Do we give special legal standing to abortions over other medical procedures because some people object to it?

I seriously am torn about what the answer is, or should be, to this question. I think the argument about the right to choose is basic, but should the child be allowed to choose whether or not to undergo any medical procedure? The emotional and intellectual ability of minors to make legal and medical decisions for themselves seems to be fluid based on the emotion surrounding an issue.

On the other hand, we force parents to provide medical care for their children when the parents only believe in faith-healing.

It seems to me that the welfare of the child (not the fetus) should be the primary deciding factor. If an argument can successfully be made for either position over the other that the child will be harmed, the courts should rule for protecting the child.

[Charlemagne]

94. I think we worry too much about being ideologically pure

Meaning that since we believe x in one case, we have to think x in all cases. Being pragmatic is just as noble as being a true-believer.

forcing faith-healers to give kids vaccination is ok with me. But at the same time I say that if she wants her child, she should be able to have it. If it helps, you could always argue that vaccinations are for the public good as it controls the spread (spread being the important word) of disease among the general population. Therefore, it is the interest of public health to get vaccinations. You would be stretching to make a similar case hear (either for or against the abortion).

So you can have your cake and eat it too.

[ecstatic]

64. Her body her choice. If, after serious counseling and discussion, she

still wants to have the child, the parents will be forced to fall in line and help support the child. Abortion is a personal decision and forcing her to have one against her will would do serious damage to her psychologically. I can't imagine them disowning her at such a young age. I just hope the pro-life zealots who are injecting themselves into the discussion will help pay for food and daycare while the young lady works a minimum wage job.

[The Straight Story]

66. Not to be contrary, but what if she wanted to smoke/drink?

It is all sort of complicated, and yet not....it seems pretty clear cut, but then other issues pop up and we ask why in case x but not y?

[ecstatic]

70. The psychological implications are different

Nobody ever regrets not being able to smoke or drink. I think parents should be in complete control of their childrens' lives, with an exception for actions/behaviors that would cause serious emotional/psychological damage (and possibly lead to suicide or more risque behavior). In this case, an abortion is the practical decision, but not so if the daughter doesn't view it that way and views it as "killing her child."

[leftyohiolib]

71. well there are laws that say she cant smoke or drink, but none against having a baby

[cthulu2016]

72. Some demarcations are drawn by nature

There is no obvious age or circumstance when the choice to smoke kicks in.

But reproductive choice must kick in when the choice actually presents itself. We can say that choice begins at 18 but nature says otherwise.

Saying that doesn't mean that only good will flow from that distinction. But for purposes of reproductive choice that choice must "attatch" whenever a human female is pregnant.

[ecstatic]

74. Great answer nt

[Charlemagne]

95. Exactly

The laws cant control when someone starts ovulating.

[Yo_Mama]

140. Yes, that's it

But reproductive choice must kick in when the choice actually presents itself.

Reality always trumps what we want reality to be.

There may be cases (mental impairment) when the individual cannot legally have the right to choose because the individual can't understand the choice, but the average 14 year-old does, IMO, because the pregnancy exists, it is her body, and she is the individual who must live with the most intimate consequences of the choice.

[cthulu2016]

69. Choice is choice. It is not always pretty.

A person's control of her reproductive capacity must coincide with her biological reproductive capacity.

The fact that we do not consider some reproductively viable females to be legally competant actors in other contexts does not make it sensible to say that choice develops at some point after choice becomes biologically meaningful.

It cannot. The basic reasons for choice are all applicable here. Nobody can compell a female to have a child, or to terminate a pregnancy.

Some people will choose poorly, which is unavoidably built into the very idea of choice. If we can make "right" decisions for a 14 year old then we ought to be competent to decide for a 30 year old as well.

The logic of choice rejects "but she's making a mistake" arguments. People often make mistakes with their rights to self-determination.

The strict application of choice, conceptually, will lead to some freak-show bad outcomes and fine-tuners will seek, with the best of intentions, to try to create a social concensus around a process.

But that social concensus is not choice. The implications of what I am saying are uncomfortable, but rights are not about good outcomes. The point of rights is that they trump bad outcomes until those outcomes are a dramatic present danger to the public welfare.

This girl deciding, however wisely or poorly, is not an uendurable threat to the public welfare.

A corollary to choice is that your choice cannot sensibly impose obligations on others who do not have that choice. Her parents ought not to face any legal compulsion to raise or support the child.

That's ugly, but it is also built into choice.

[moriah]

73. Agreed.

[ehrnst]

83. The reality is that no abortion provider will give her one now.

The only option that is guaranteed a pregnant teen is childbearing, despite what these lawyers claim.

Even if her parents get her all the way to the clinic, when she says no when given the consent form, the clinic will respect that.

We are arguing more about how the parents should deal with this than the law and abortion providers. Parents should not be "compelling" their child in the way that these parents allegedly are about this issue.

But, can or will will a judge issue a restraining order to stop them from "compelling" her? That's the big question, not whether or not she will have an abortion.

[slackmaster]

85. Freedom of choice carries the risk of people sometimes making poor choices

[ddeclue]

86. You can't argue out of both sides of your mouth on this one...

If you want minors to be able to make the decision to be able to have an abortion without interference from parents then you can't also argue that the decision NOT to have an abortion is not ALSO hers to make. The decision is hers - not her parents. What she decides either way should be up to her not them. I hope the judge sees it this way.

[leftyohiolib]

98. thankyou.

[Mosby]

96. I think it should be up to the parents

A minor is a minor, is the courts change that then what?

[MineralMan]

97. When it comes to reproductive rights,

That's already been decided by legislatures and courts. Minors do have the right to control their own reproductive rights. It's established law in most jurisdictions. There are some states who have tried to do an end-around on this, but all of them, I believe let minors seek reproductive choice in court.

Parents do not have absolute authority over their minor children in all areas. Not by a long shot.

[MineralMan]

101. No, I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that minors have the right to

control their own reproductive choices.

There is a difference. Think about it.

[Mosby]

102. I see the difference

but the parents or gaurdians still have to care for the teen and child though, so it's not really just about the pregnant teen.

[uppityperson]

145. What if she wanted the abortion and parents didn't? What if they were willing to support her&baby

and thought having an abortion was wrong? Should they have the right to prohibit her from getting an abortion?

[hamsterjill]

103. I wonder how much influence is being put on her

By the Texas Center for Defense of Life to continue the pregnancy? Just wondering...

If it is indeed her choice to continue with the pregnancy, if she is deemed capable to make that choice, and if her family is off the hook for any burden that the pregnancy might put on them, then I'm for choice.

But I must say that if this young lady were my daughter, I would be trying to convince her to end the pregnancy.

[obamanut2012]

108. No enough information yet

1. Who is the father?

2. IS she mentally challenged?

3. Was she pressured in anyway to keep the baby?

4. Do her parents have legal guardianship of her still?


I doubt she met the age of consent. She is a child. Choice is choice to an extent, but this is not only a minor, but a child. We don't let 14-yuear-olds choose to smoke or drink or do drugs, or date someone much older than them, or move out and live alone, or decide to move to Colombia. Unless the family is trying to hid something, ie incest, then I say they have the right to make the choice for their child.

She also needs to be evaluated.

If the person who impregnated her is 18 or older, they need to be arrested.

I would like to know what undue influence this anti abortion group has on her.

A court would never emancipate a child that young, although they can give legal guardianship to someone else.

This girl has no idea what she is agreeing to.

[uppityperson]

146. I'd like to know about he cousin who assaulted her, cousin who claimed mentally unstable

are they same cousin? different cousins?

Also who raped her, since she is 14 it is statutory rape.

Other than that, her body, her choice. She could have an idea what she is agreeing to, or could have been unduly unduly influenced by the anti-choicers.

What if the 14 yr old wanted an abortion, but the parents didn't. What if they were willing to raise the baby if she didn't have an abortion? Should they have the right to deny her the abortion?

[my2sense]

109. Marking this for follow up....

[Texasgal]

110. This is a tough one.

She is pregnant illegally, meaning that whoever the male in this has broken the law. Statutory rape. It's against the law.

At 14 I believe her parents need to make her medical decision a for her. I will agree that this is a very tough situation. It's unfortunate that she is pregnant at such a young age. I am not sure how I personally would handle this situation. Very tough.

[The Straight Story]

111. Not seeing whom she got pregnant by

My 14 yr old neighbor gave birth Jan 3 (one reason the story caught my eye), her 14 yr boyfriend (another neighbor) is the dad (no one was surprised by the whole thing...her dad let the boy stay the night and sleep in her room. Then again, he has a long history of crime and such....).

At any rate, it is an all around bad situation.

One edit, checked her FB and she is 15, she got pregnant when she was 14 :/

[moriah]

115. If the male was 14, did he break the law, too?

We really don't have a lot of details on that portion of it.

I just have a really, *really* big issue with anyone being forced to have any kind of medical procedure that is not necessary to save their life against their will. If a person can in most family court decisions decide to live with a specific parent at 12, or a 16 year old can refuse cancer treatment (tho in that case the parents agreed with the kid).... then forcing someone to do something that they might personally consider murder? Even if I don't? No, sorry. Just can't.

[Texasgal]

116. I think it is still a legal issue.

From what I understand if a boy impregnates a girl under 16 it is statutory rape no matter the age of the offender.

I maybe wrong...???

[moriah]

117. Kinda farked if it's that way.

Usually there are the "Romeo and Juliet" laws giving a specific age range that they presume that the kids are on the same level. Least here in Arkansas.

Edit to add: The lawbooks (which still have nasty laws on the books that are not enforceable....)

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/docs/pe/htm/pe.21.htm

Affirmative defense if no more than a 3 year age difference.

[Nevernose]

119. No, it wasn't illegal

Assuming the father was also 15, in Texas it is an affirmative defense (within 3 years of age). Technically illegal, but probably not prosecutable.

[uppityperson]

147. What if it were reversed, she wanted abortion, parents said no? Would you agree they need to make

her medical decision for her?

It is a tough situation.

[Hippo_Tron]

167. What if her parents are alternative medicine nutjobs

And she has cancer and wants actual treatment?

I agree that it's cut and dry that parents need to make medical decisions for their 14 year old children like "No, you can't have cosmetic surgery". But I think that when there's a disagreement between parents and child over actual serious medical issues, it becomes a lot more complicated.

[marlakay]

118. The girl should be able to have choice but then if the parents

Dont want to raise the child they could put their daughter in foster care. Tough call but so is having sex and getting pregnant at 14.

[Liquorice]

124. It would be an abdication of responsibility to put their daughter in foster care. It would

also be a cold and unloving move.They have a responsibility for their child through good and bad. You can't just give up your kid to the state because she got pregnant. What kind of sick parent would do such a thing? They have to take care of her and their grandchild, unless the daughter decides to give up the baby for adoption.

[Charlemagne]

125. Im friends with this gal

and her sister got pregnant when she was 16. The parents, who are rather authoritative when it comes to their daughters, essentially forced the girl to give up the child to adoption. So it does happen. The dad is the dick. we will blame it on him.

[ehrnst]

127. Wow.

So why does this girl want to have a baby at 14?

Is she realistic about what's involved - be it raising the baby, or giving it up for adoption?

[marlakay]

137. I will tell you what kind of parent

life is not what you would want it to be sometimes. When my oldest daughter was 14 she ran away a bunch of times. She and I use to be close but when she turned 13 after the divorce she just went wild. I divorced my ex because he was on drugs (and this wasn't the first time he did them and wouldn't get off and I didn't want my kids around that) and got zero child support and left with mortgage and only a $10 hour job and all the bills.

My girls and I shared my room and we had to rent out two rooms to pay the bills. This wasn't an easy time in my life.

After she ran away again to her fathers and I found out she was starting to do drugs also, I said you have a choice you can go to foster care or to stay with some friends I knew in the church. She picked the friends.

They were great people and were wonderful with her and got her off drugs and with a better understanding of life.

Today she is a manager (32) and we are very close.

But don't jump to conclusions when people make statements like the one I did about foster care. I didn't say it was a easy choice I would make. I was desperate when I made it and worried like hell about her. Nothing I did or said was getting through to her at the time.

I said what I did because if my daughter got pregnant I couldn't have afforded it. Not because I am a bad parent.

[ehrnst]

129. Foster care is tough to find for teens - let alone a pregnant teen. (nt)

[Tx4obama]

121. This 2012. There should be no such thing as a 'forced abortion' n/t

[ehrnst]

126. There isn't. Coerced, perhaps - but no one will strap you to a table

and force you to have an abortion.

[moriah]

164. And you're playing word games.

"In physics, a force is any influence that causes an object to undergo a change in speed, a change in direction, or a change in shape."

-- Wikipedia

-------

Definition of COERCE
transitive verb
1: to restrain or dominate by force <religion in the past has tried to coerce the irreligious — W. R. Inge>
2: to compel to an act or choice <was coerced into agreeing>
3: to achieve by force or threat <coerce compliance>

-- Webster's Dictionary.

------------------------------------------

Coercion IS force.

The whole unifying issue is the fact that putting undue influence on a person to make a decision they would not make otherwise abrogates choice.

The question is not whether a provider is going to strap a girl down and shove something inside her vagina. The issue is how old a person should be before they have the right to legally decline having something shoved inside them that they don't want there.

[ehrnst]

170. The ANTI's are the ones playing the word games here - I'm just stating the absurdity of logic.

But no one's going to do this - you might as well say her parents can coerce her into an amputation. And we'd be having the discussion, "Parents shouldn't be able to have their kids' healthy limbs cut off."

Theoretically, they could, there's no law against it per-se, but it woudn't happen, because physicians wouldn't do it.

The anti-choice claim that legal abortions can be 'forced' on women is just like when they started saying that there needed to be a law to prevent so-called "partial birth abortion/ abortion at 8.5 months" on demand.

Even though there was no evidence that healthy women with healthy pregnancies were suddenly deciding at 8 months that they wanted an abortion, suddenly people were saying, "I'm pro-choice, but there need to be some limits. I think women shouldn't be waiting until their 8 months along to do this."

I kept saying, "THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN IN THE US!! Even if a woman wanted one for some reason, no physician will perform such an abortion on a healthy pregnancy."

This doesn't mean that it's not "possible" to "coerce" someone into ending their healthy pregnancy at 8 months - as per your argument. But even in states that don't have specific bans on the books - you have to have a physician that will participate in the process.


Lifesite news claims that the FACE act somehow makes it "legal" for a happily pregnant woman having a routine exam to be strapped down and given an abortion, simply because the OB thinks that it's endangering her health.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/texas-teen-spared-forced-abortion-for-two-weeks

[Liquorice]

123. Nobody should be forced to get an abortion. I wonder who the

father is. If he is older, which is my hunch, they should pursue statutory rape charges. If not, they should pursue child support from him and his family after the baby is born.

[ehrnst]

128. Statutory rape is seldom prosecuted if the two are of similar age.

I don't think that these people are going to be very responsible grandparents if they don't want her to even give birth.

From what another poster said - her older sister had a baby at 16, and the parents convinced her to give the baby up for adoption - even though she wanted to keep it.

[Odin2005]

132. Forcing her to get an abortion would just drive her further into the hands of the anti-choicers.

She would become a cause celebre of the anti-choicers who would spam the media with BS about "evil liberals forcing you to have an abortion".

[ehrnst]

134. They can't force her to have an abortion - no one will perform one

an an unwilling patient. She has to give consent before they will proceed.

[ehrnst]

135. More information here:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/pregnant-texas-teen-court-fight-familys-abortion-plan/story?id=15328801

[Yo_Mama]

139. If you support the right of a 14 year-old to choose an abortion

then you have to support the right of a 14 year-old to choose not to have an abortion.

I realize there are issues either way, but the right to choose is the right to choose. I do not approve of a family forcing an average 14 year-old either to carry to term or have an abortion.

Of course if she doesn't have an abortion, she may be financially forced to give the child up for adoption, but that is a much better outcome for some young mothers. It depends on how the individual feels about it. Some of the women who could never choose an abortion I have met had no religious faith at all, but were the types that had a strong sense of connection with the unborn child. This might be biological - who knows?

In any case, this particular teen may not be the typical 14 year-old. This is in court where it belongs. If she has diminished mental capacity, it might be a case more equivalent to an 8 year-old not wanting to have an abortion. If I were the judge, I'd want a social worker to sit down with her and assess whether she really understands the situation and her options, and the consequences of her decision. If she cannot live with the option of giving up the child either, she's not really making a choice. She's making the choice to try to force her family to keep and support the child, and that she does not have the right to do.

[Suji to Seoul]

143. This seems cut and dry. Unless she is petitioning for emancipation, the family can control their

child and do not need her permission. She's 14.

She is a minor. . .where is the mental check on her?

And the ghouls that support her are just using her to push an anti-choice agenda.

[uppityperson]

149. reverse the situation. What if she wanted an abortion, parent said no. Is that ok with you, "family

can control their child and do not need her permission"? Let's say the parents were willing to raise the baby, should they have the right to deny her an abortion because she is 14, a minor?

I support her decision, her body, her decision, though find this situation tragic all the way around. Are you saying I support "anti-choice agenda" for supporting choice?

[Suji to Seoul]

150. reverse the situation: Yes, I would say the same thing!

Children are minors in the eyes of the law. If she wants to do this, petition for emancipation as well and raise the kid on your own.

[uppityperson]

151. To clarify, parents should be able to make pregnant minor have the child, deny an abortion.

Thank you for answering. I totally disagree with you. The choice belongs to the pregnant person. Period. Yes, 14 yr olds are minors in the eyes of the law, but fortunately reproductive health and mental health issues go beyond that in a lot of states.

Should parents of a 14 yr old deny her the right to contraception?

[Suji to Seoul]

152. If the parents were parents at all, the kid would not be doing it.

But since no one had the sex talk with her, apparently, someone messed up.

As for the child. . .you can disagree. I doubt the law would disagree with me. Sadly, this girl, who by accounts of the news article is unstable to begin with, is now a pawn for anti-choice crusaders. They care not whether the 14 womb can hold the baby or the damage the pregnancy will do, but that the abortion does not happen because of their narrow political agenda.

That's the true story here.

[uppityperson]

153. You did read that the cousins grabbed her by her throat, struck and threatened to beat her more...

Those cousins, the ones that claimed she was unstable? You did read that, right? Personally I'd not put much trust on to his "she's unstable" comment, what with him assaulting her and all.

And even though you state her parents were no parents at all, you want to give them the right to control her reproductive health?

I agree with "is now a pawn for anti-choice crusaders" and my hatred for them makes me want to distrust everything about this story. I don't believe parents should have the right to make reproductive health choices for their minors (male or female). The fact that anti-choicers are involved makes me question what this 14 yr old is doing, why she is doing it. Also from the story it sounds like she's tired of being pushed this way and that by her family, so is she doing this from acting out against the family, or because she found a "sympathetic ear" in anti-choicers, temporary as that may be.

I am glad the court is involved, hope they figure it all out.

[Arkansas Granny]

157. Having the sex talk with your kids and making birth control accessible to them does not

guarantee that they won't wind up pregnant or getting someone pregnant.

Nature makes the body ready and willing for sexual activity many years sooner than society thinks is advisable.

[hughee99]

154. Exactly! She's 14. The family can control her and don't need her permission.

This is why we should all be fighting to make sure anyone under 18 who goes to a doctor for an abortion has parental approval first. After all, this is the parents decision to make, not hers... Right?

[Hippo_Tron]

166. What if the family are a bunch of crazy alternative medicine nutjobs

And the child has cancer and wants actual treatment, but they refuse to give permission?

I think there are certain decisions where's it's cut and dry to say that the parents have absolute control over a 14 year old. But medical decisions are anything but cut and dry, IMO.

[Sgent]

184. Depends on the state

In many states a "minor" is defined as under 14-16 for purposes of reproductive rights.

She may be considered an adult under state law for these purposes.

[mrs_p]

148. When I was training as an EMT

teenagers who could possibly pregnant were for all intents and purposes treated as adults. Meaning, they were right then and there responsible for their medical decisions and parents could not intervene (or deny treatment).

[Canuckistanian]

165. We're all about pro-choice, right?

So, this is her choice. And whether it's the state or family members, ultimately the choice is HERS.

[ehrnst]

174. And it will be. The Anti lawyers state that her family can "force her to have an abortion"

But tellingly, the judge saw only a need to restrain the family from "talking about abortion" with her.

The judge knows that no clinic will give that girl an abortion - all she has to do is express doubt, and they will not proceed.

The option to give birth is hers, and was never in doubt. If there is one thing that teens can absolutely do against their parents will, and without their parents consent is to give birth.

The idea that there is even a discussion that her parent could actually get an abortion performed on her - against her will - by a legal abortion provider, is indicative of how successful anti's have hijacked the conversation about reproductive rights.

A 14 year old with enough chutzpah to sic lawyers on her family being convinced to succesfully lie to a clinic counselor trained to spot doubt or coercion is fantasy.

We should be more outraged at these lawyers who are shamelessly exploiting her to get these sorts of misleading headlines in the paper, and her family for handling this situation so badly that she fled the house.

[Canuckistanian]

181. Very informative, thanks

And I agree 100%. This is craziness.

[ehrnst]

176. The original story in the newspaper pulls mostly from the "pro-life" lawyer's news release

Which explains the misleading headline - that implies that there could be an abortion 'forced' on her, which is a misinformation campaign they've been waging for awhile.


http://www.caller.com/news/2012/jan/04/judge-appoints-guardian-pregnant-14-year-old-whos/


There isn't any chance of this girl being forced to get a legal abortion - any clinic will send her back out the door the second they figure out that she's not consenting to this.

The judge is trying to figure out what she wants by appointing a different attorney, and will honor that - as long as she wants to give birth. If, however, she wanted an abortion against her parents will, she would likely be forced into childbirth, with the judge's consent.

[ehrnst]

182. The case has been "resolved"

The only ones talking publicly about it are the reps from the "pro-life" organization, who are still spinning this as Roe v Wade making it possible for this girls parent's to somehow force her to have an abortion:

http://articles.cnn.com/2012-01-18/us/us_texas-pregnant-teen_1_abortion-threat-texas-suit-supreme-court-case?_s=PM:US