Mom, 13, is ruled a sex crime offender

[norml]

Mom, 13, is ruled a sex crime offender

Appeals court: But she is also a victim; a boy, then 12, fathered her baby, and he is also a victim and perpetrator

By Pamela Manson
The Salt Lake Tribune



An appeals court on Friday upheld a judge's refusal to dismiss a sexual abuse allegation against a 13-year-old Ogden girl who became pregnant by her 12-year-old boyfriend.

The Utah Court of Appeals says the law's "rigorous protections" for younger minors include protecting them from each other.

The decision leaves the teens in the odd position of each being both a victim and a perpetrator in the same offense.

"The Legislature certainly may act to protect the health and safety of children, and may more vigorously protect those of more tender years," Judge Gregory Orme wrote for a three-member panel of the court, which made its decision "with some reluctance."

The girl's Ogden attorneys, Randall Richards and Dee Smith, are considering an appeal to the Utah Supreme Court.

Richards pointed out that Utah law says minors under age 14 do not have the ability to consent to sexual activity.

"It's a paradox," he said. "How can they be old enough to commit an offense if they're not old enough to consent to it?"


snip


http://www.sltrib.com/utah/ci_3358959

[niyad]

1. this passes truly ludicrous by miles.

[bbinacan]

2. Too weird. n/t

[Catherine Vincent]

3. Appeals court morons!

[jaxx]

4. Why is a 13 year old allowed to be a mom?

This blows me away.

[Left Is Write]

5. What would you suggest?

Forced abortion or forced adoption?

[jaxx]

8. Either.....but not giving a 13 year old kid the weight of being a parent

Babies shouldn't be having babies, even if they figured out how to make them.

[LisaL]

9. You can not seriously suggest we should be forcing abortions

on minors.

[jaxx]

11. Nevermind. I can see this will go nowhere.

[proud2BlibKansan]

13. I will suggest it.

A 13 year old is not old enough to be a parent. Also the health consequences from a pregnancy at that age can be quite severe.

If that 13 year old was my child, she would be getting an abortion.

[LisaL]

14. She is not.

The parent has a right to make health decisions for minors, that's true. But minors are not required to inform their parents if they decide to have an abortion. So, I imagine that means parent can not decide whether the child should have an abortion or not. Would you then support the bill requiring minors to inform their parents if they decide to have an abortion?

[proud2BlibKansan]

16. Yes I do support that law

But I have always supported a clause in that law allowing girls to go to a judge for permission if they cannot get it from their parents. For example, if a girl is raped by her father or another family member, it may be difficult to get parental permission for an abortion. Also some girls are in foster care.

What other medical care can a child under 18 get without parental approval? It only makes sense that it should also be required for abortion.

[LisaL]

18. Well, maybe her parents did not want her to have an abortion.

What then? Or she might have not told them she was pregnant until it was too late to have an abortion. And frankly, I don't believe in forcing abortion on anyone, even on a minor.

[proud2BlibKansan]

22. As I said in another post,

she should be allowed to go to a judge for permission if her parents refuse or if for some reason she can't ask them.

Parental permission is needed for all medical care for minors. Why in the world would we not want it for abortion too? We won't let her drive a car but she can choose an abortion? I don't think so.

[LisaL]

24. Maybe neither her nor her parents wanted her to have

an abortion. Maybe they are all perfectly happy she had a child at 13. It's Utah, after all.

[proud2BlibKansan]

28. And no matter where they live, they have the right to make that decision

I think it's nuts to allow a 13 year old to carry a baby to term, but it's not my daughter.

[Solon]

45. Since when were parent's permission required for medical care of children?

Parents have been thrown in jail for refusing medical treatment for their own kids, when it leads to either injury, sickness, or death, why should abortion be any different? Its a potentially life threatening condition, any parent that makes a decision where it makes it more difficult for their child to have access to the medical care they need, up to and including an abortion, needs to be thrown in jail.

[proud2BlibKansan]

46. Parents have to give consent for ALL medical care

Since when I don't know.

[Solon]

47. No they don't...

If your child was in an accident at school, or anywhere away from you, and you cannot be contacted, the Doctors are NOT going to wait around for the kid to die so they can get a damned permission slip. Also, parents do NOT have the right to deny REQUIRED medical care to their child, especially preventative care. Look here for some examples:

http://www.masskids.org/dbre/dbre_2.html

You were saying?

[proud2BlibKansan]

52. Nope, parents have to approve

unless it is an emergency. Anytime ANYONE gets medical care, they have to consent to it.

[Solon]

55. Only if it is elective, not required...

Parents do NOT have the right to deny children life or health, period. Out of the womb, if a child needs medications to live, and parents flatly refuse to allow them to have said medication, they should, and most likely will, get thrown in jail. I feel, personally, that this should be extended to the potentially life threatening condition of pubescent pregnancies, which also lead to complications, including injury or death. So if parents refuse to consent, or, in any case, make it difficult for the child to have access to needed medical care, then they should be thrown in jail for child endangerment. Children are NOT the property of parents.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

15. I'm so torn...

I believe it should be the mother's choice.

but she's SO young.

I had a baby at 17, but I don't think I could have even have comprehended the situation at 13.

[proud2BlibKansan]

17. A 13 year old is not an adult

She can't drive or vote or buy cigarettes or alcohol. But we want to let her consent to an abortion? It doesn't make any sense.

[LisaL]

19. She is still a human being, and it's her body we are talking about.

She ought to have at least something to do with what is done to her body.
And considering she is from Utah, it's entirely possible her parents did not want her to have an abortion anyway.

[proud2BlibKansan]

26. She is a CHILD

She does not have any say over her medical care yet. She can't even have a cavity filled without parental consent. So no, she can't decide what happens to her own teeth, much less her uterus.

Now if we allow her to decide on an abortion, should she also be able to go rent her own apartment?

[LisaL]

31. She obviously decided to have sex all on her own.

Parents can not control everything their kids do.

[proud2BlibKansan]

33. But LEGALLY they are required to give consent for medical care

If their consent for sex was required, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

[LisaL]

35. Their consent for sex is not required because it's obvious

kids won't listen.

[proud2BlibKansan]

38. Can you imagine?

"Hey come on over, my parents aren't home and they signed the sex approval notice today!"

[LisaL]

41. I am afraid the parents would end up in jail for that.

:rofl:

[Montauk6]

42. And here's something to throw the discussion in a tailspin...

What is the *biological* definition of a child? Once a female becomes capable of successful gestation, doesn't this render the term "minor" a sociopolitical construct? Societies more ancient than ours allowed marriage for females as young as 13; were they promoting jailbait or simply acknowledging a biological reality? And was that biological reality the shorter average lifespans or the point of first menses?

Fighters, take your stance... HAJIME!
:popcorn:

[Porcupine]

48. Look, biology just interferes with the truthiness of decisions

It simply does not matter what the biological "facts" of these issues are. The definition of "child" is consistant from birth to the minute before the 18th birthday.

They both had sex with a child. They should be branded as sex offenders and harrased until they commit suicide.

[Montauk6]

59. Shall we also call them "WITCH!" and bring the charcoal briquets?

;-)

[proud2BlibKansan]

53. Our society has a LEGAL definition; it is under 18 years old

[Viva_La_Revolution]

27. or FORCE one upon her?

you're right. It makes no sense.

[proud2BlibKansan]

29. Agreed

If it was my kid, I would want to be involved in this decision.

[dsc]

58. so if I had a 13 year old I should have the right to force her give birth?

I fail to see any difference here at all. If you are pro choice for 13 year olds then the 13 year old makes the choice, not you.

[Left Is Write]

10. It's a little late once the proverbial cow has escaped the barnyard.

Maybe she shouldn't be having babies - or sex, for that matter, at her age - but what's done is done. I cannot support forced abortions or forced adoption.

[LisaL]

12. Realistically, she won't be able to support the child.

Either her parents will have to do it, or she will have to give the child up. And that raises up an interesting question-what about the father and child support?

[Horse with no Name]

57. One of my very best friends

Got pregnant when she was 13.
The Father of the baby was 16.
They got married. They had the child when she was 14.
Both of these kids finished High School. My friend also had her second baby 2 weeks after she graduated from High School. He worked at a local grocery store as a stocker. She worked at Dairy Queen. They had their own apartment. They supported themselves, however, did use food stamps and Medicaid.
She proceeded to go to College and became a school teacher. He went to work for TDCJ and has been there almost 13 years.
I am not advocating this to anyone, but these "kids" are still married 18 years later and that baby that she had graduates from High School this year and is a good kid.
I've always looked up to my friend for being able to make it under extremely difficult odds.
There are never broad brush solutions here.

[Deja Q]

36. A 12 year old girl... her own body isn't fully developed.

What's the historical stats on girls that young successfully delivering babies with no defects?

Just a thought; it's none of my business as to what happens. I'm just concerned for the mother-to-be's health.

[proud2BlibKansan]

39. Not good stats

They are more likely to have complications during pregnancy and their babies are at high risk for birth defects.

[LisaL]

6. I don't think she asked anyone for permission.

[enki23]

7. my reaction ("fucking insane") is, apparently, synonmyous with "Utah"

.

[ladjf]

20. The human race just might be the dumbest species on Earth.

[LincolnMcGrath]

21. Well, Do you DUers who support Sex Off. Registry feel good about this?

[proud2BlibKansan]

34. Good point. And one reason I do NOT support them

[Porcupine]

49. Yeah, and how exactly do you send a sex offender to school

Junior High School at that. I mean if one sex offender gets to go to a Junior High shouldn't all of them?

[Pushed To The Left]

23. Absolutely moronic decision by the court

I wonder what would happen if a large 12-year-old boy raped an adult woman, or for that matter a 14-year-old girl. Would the rape victim then be charged with sexual abuse?

[LisaL]

32. No, the victim won't be charged.

[madeline_con]

25. Do you think this has anything to do with Mormons? eom

[Matariki]

30. early sex ed?

[madeline_con]

43. LOL! No, the stigmatization of 2 kids. eom

[Maru Kitteh]

37. creepy and disgusting

really.

[Crunchy Frog]

40. Kind of reminds me of the time my brother had a warrant out on him

for kidnapping, because he and his year older than him girlfriend ran off together. The whole thing is ridiculous.

There has to be some kind of category other than the conventional adult criminal categories to describe consensual sexual activity between juveniles who are close in age. At any rate, I don't see how criminal charges will do anything to address the real issues stemming from this case, that is, a pregnant 13 year old.

It's naive to believe that juveniles will not engage in sexual behavior with each other. Even much younger children play engage in a certain amount of exploration. Are they going to start arresting and prosecuting six year olds for playing "doctor"?

Child sexual activity is pathological when it is non-consensual, or when it involves significant disparities in age or power. Other than that, it is fairly frequent and normal event. I think these kid's parents needed to do a good deal more communicating with their kids, and should have explored birth control options with them, if they couldn't persuade them from holding off.

[darkism]

44. "Are they going to start arresting and prosecuting six year olds..."

"Are they going to start arresting and prosecuting six year olds for playing "doctor"?"

I'm pretty sure that kind of nuttery has already happened in this country.

[Endangered Specie]

50. and I thought it was only the "godless liberals" that let their kids

get knocked up that early?

[AgadorSparticus]

51. I'm not sure what's more shocking: a pregnant 13yo or a court who

considers both of them sex offenders!! :wow:

[aikoaiko]

54. These kids have bigger problems than their sex offender status now.

[Hello_Kitty]

56. Let's just say they cancel each other out and call it a day! n/t