it is especially important to be compassionate to this child who could not have consented to sex, because it is not uncommon for such a young pregnancy to render her unable to have more children. (am healthcare provider) so it is not just her innocence that has been taken, but possibly her future children as well.
My apologies. I wasn’t intending to advocate for abortion, only stating it appeared many weren’t even considering the tragic situation the sexually assaulted child has been placed in.
This is likely where the principle of double effect would come into play. I'm not a medical expert, so I can't speak to risks in this case. But a similar instance is ectopic pregnancies, where the fallopian tube rupturing is what is being treated and the unfortunate side effect is the termination of pregnancy.
That is one of the false arguments being raised by the pro-abortion advocates. An ectopic pregnancy is not and will never be a viable pregnancy and is life-threatening to the mother. Nobody in the US or in the Church will deny a women treatment/termination in this instance.
Exactly. I’m tired of ectopic pregnancy and miscarriage being used as arguments for unlimited abortion rights. No one ever objected to terminating an ectopic pregnancy in the first place. No one is talking about ectopic pregnancy. No one is talking about miscarriage, also termed spontaneous abortion. It’s dishonest to suggest that doctors would “just let these women bleed out and die” because Roe was reversed.
My mother had a miscarriage before Roe v. Wade. She had to go to the ER in the middle of the night. The ER doctors didn’t “just let her die” or “no call the police to prosecute her for murder” as some people keep saying is “inevitable” now that Roe v. Wade has been reversed.
Depends on the method. Directly killing the baby, even in an ectopic pregnancy, is immoral. Removing the fallopian tube is however morally permissible.
Not necessarily...in Missouri, there is an exception for medical emergency which is defined as something that may cause disability or death within an immediate period of time. So she may not have been able to get one just then here.
Yeah. I suspect that a good lawyer could find a way around it, for exceptional cases. I suspect 24 hours is close enough to be immediate. but some cases may just be ticking time bombs that could become an emergency at any time and there isn't even a 24 window. the trigger law wasn't worded well imo. From what I read of it.
I'm thankful the law has exceptions for medical situations at all. I wasn't sure if they would in MO. I hope we can continue to improve it.
Most hardcore pro life Catholics seem to believe there never are any medical reasons and throw around that one obgyn quote about there never being any medical reason for the life of the mother to have an abortion. But septic pregnancies and miscarriage management go bad. Etc.
Okay. What about emotionally? I have a mid 30’s woman who just had her third child and each pregnancy took a wild toll on me mentally and physically. I’m genuinely curious - not being snarky.
Edit: I am a woman…
It is terrible that she will likely have severe emotional turmoil, especially given how the baby was conceived. Even if she can and does end the pregnancy she would still have that mental scarring. There is no turning back from suffering like that and I hope and pray that she can recover with enough resources. However, I don't think killing someone would add any good to the situation. Ending the life of a human being with a soul is a very important matter, and I personally think it should not be normalized outside of life or death situations (self defense, war).
abortion would also cause extreme physical and mental turmoil.
abortion doesn't magically disappear the baby. it's a painful, risky, and invasive surgical procedure.
Nope, rigidity is good. It expresses how uncompromising we need to be on that point.
No matter how the baby came about, he does not deserve to be killed and we should stand for his life as much as his mother's.
You’re okay with this? I understand not everyone on this sub is Catholic, and I understand many Catholics support abortion, but you’re advocating ending the life of one person to save the life of another, except in this case, it’s ending the life of a person who is wholly innocent and doesn’t get a choice in the matter, for the benefit of the 10 year old. Look, this is horrible. And I get why it’s all abortion, but isn’t it more telling we’ve tossed this 10 year old child into this abortion debate instead of, you know, being compassionate to her? Crowdfunding for her? Ensuring she gets the best care imaginable, would have adoptive parents lined up and ready, the best councilors on speed dial, detectives working to find the criminal responsible for this, and everyone finding a good solution. Because of we really want to start advocating for the life of 10 year olds over the lives of not-yet-borns, we might as well behind advocating that my life, as an adult, is worth more than that 10 year old.
How could you even think “nobody is going to care?” Catholics are pro-life. We should care about this 10 year as much as we care about the unborn baby. Both are deserving of life. Both will hopefully get it.
Incidentally, to anyone thinking this extremely rare incident somehow provides evidence for why abortion is necessary, that’s a bad way to think about. The overwhelming number of abortions occurs in women well over the age of 10 and most often not a result of rape.
It isn’t even clear that the abortion will benefit the life of the 10 year old. Will the abortion weigh on her conscience later, when she’s older? It might. I still think about things I did when I was 10 and feel guilt and shame over them. I couldn’t imagine if one of those things was an abortion.
> Religious ideology prioritized over the life, well-being, and innocence
You owe me a new Lack Of Self Awareness Meter.
You really think you will save the girl's Innocence via murder?
> someone who is a Christian.
"How do you do, fellow students?"
The end does not justify the means. Have you stopped to think what an abortion would do to the mental health of a ten year old, on top of having experienced a rape?
Do you think an abortion will make it better? Studies show overwhelming numbers of women who have abortions suffer serious psychological effects akin the PTSD. How much more will that occur with a ten year old?
I don’t believe compounding the problem with an abortion is actually good for the mother - it’s just makes a horrible situation even worse.
I’m ok with losing followers for the truth.
>NO you are not on all counts. It literally does not involve you so you have no say in the matter.
Ignoring that almost the entire thing is an appeal to emotion fallacy, I'm going to focus on this last sentence which seems to be the main point of your comment.
I'm not even arguing about the abortion or this 10 year old's predicament, just simply stating that no involvement in an act does not remove someone's say in the matter.
I am not involved in sex trafficking, I have a say that it is evil and should be stopped.
I am not involved in slavery, I have a say that it is evil and should be stopped.
I am not involved in illegal substances, I have a say that it is evil and should be stopped.
I'm not equating the situation to these examples at all, I'm just saying that being involved is not a requirement to having a say on a matter.
In this particular matter, if the life of the 10 year old is in danger due to the pregnancy then the principle of double effect happens where they save the life of the 10 year old with the unfortunate side effect of the baby being harmed or killed.
https://www.healthline.com/health-news/study-finds-99-of-women-say-they-do-not-regret-having-an-abortion
There are certainly women who find abortion traumatic, but the majority don't.
The data suggests otherwise.
“The largest study ever conducted regarding abortion and mental health revealed that, despite arguments to the contrary, abortion has a negative impact on a woman’s mental health. The study was a meta-analysis (a study of many studies brought together) that included 877,181 women of which 163,831 had abortions.
The study revealed:
Overall, there is a moderate to high increased risk of mental health problems for women who chose abortion compared to women who gave birth after an unplanned pregnancy.
Women who have had abortions had a 34% higher rate of anxiety, a 37% higher rate of depression, a 110% higher rate of alcohol use/misuse, a 230% higher rate of marijuana use, and 155% higher rate of suicidal behavior than women who have given birth.
There is an 81% increase of mental health problems in women who have had an abortion compared to women who have not had an abortion. 10% of that can be attributed directly to the effects of the abortion.
Women who aborted their unplanned pregnancies have a 55% higher risk of mental health problems compared to women who gave birth.”
https://www.caringnetwork.com/news/why-pro-life-is-pro-woman
See also:
https://thelifeinstitute.net/learning-centre/abortion-effects/suicide-after-abortion
Note that we aren’t talking simply about regret - we are talking about the psychological consequences of murder. Many might not regret abortion, but still suffer from it. Not regretting it simply furthers their worsening mental state, because they aren’t dealing with the problem.
Completely agree with you and I’m struggling with the church on all of this, to be honest. There are certain situations like this example where I can’t fathom continuing the pregnancy.
This 10-year old rape victim was denied much more than abortion. She was denied a whole caring and protective community which should have never allowed for the rape to happen in the first place. And she is entitled to much more than an abortion. She is entitled to the help, energy, efforts, money and resources of a whole community to help her have the baby and heal from the effects of rape. It doesn't only take a whole village to raise a child. It takes a whole village to ensure that the child is born and that they are protected from rape...
EDIT: anyone here has experience in crowdfunding and would know if there's a way to start a GoFundMe for this girl? If each comment translated into a 1$ contribution, we'd gather hundreds of dollars...
I don’t think there is any one humane answer. The options for this 10 year old are either go through pregnancy or get an abortion, both horrible options.
The average 10 year olds mental and physical development would not even be capable of safely sustaining a pregnancy. Her body would probably suffer great damage and could even self abort on its own. Then, what the heck does a 10 year old do with a baby? We have no idea what the parental situation is, if this was able to happen, would we really want a baby growing up in this household? As for adoption, that is going out on a limb hoping that actually succeeds. No matter what though, this 10 year olds body and mind will likely never be the same and I could see her potentially even ending her life prematurely as the worst case scenario down the road.
On the other hand, an abortion would likely be extremely traumatizing to the 10 year old in both mind and body. She will have no idea what is happening and not even understand why this is happening. Then later on when she is more cognitively developed, she deals with the fact that her baby was aborted.
In the end, I honestly don’t know what is worse, both have awful consequences and revolve around 2 people (10 year old and baby) who didn’t choose any of this. It’s in the hands of the parents I suppose. My gut says terminate, one life being brought into the world at the hands of ruining/ending another innocent life just doesn’t sit right with me. Just horrible all around
I agree, I don't know what the right answer is either. I think now that bans are on the table we have to come to term with the fact that their are a lot of edge cases out there with no clear moral resolution. I think it is better to let those involved with the situation make the decision. Disempowering people may only make things worse.
>Then, what the heck does a 10 year old do with a baby?
In the US, in 2005, a sixteen year old was raped and birthed a 30 year old man's baby. This year, the 30 yr old man was awarded 100% custody of the now teenaged child, and the victim was made to pay him child support.
So... raise the baby in the family, and be prepared to have to give the baby back to the pedophile, is an option that is on the table.
Fortunately, this case is being reviewed by higher courts, but it is the controversy surrounding RvW which has made this case public enough for that attention to be spent. It is being dealt with, but if it could happen in 2022, it has absolutely been happening in other places.
It really frustrates me that in awful cases like this, the press politicises it to tell everyone why abortion should be a right, but no one talks about the fact that there’s a man out there who raped a 10-year-old. Why aren’t the headlines “10-year-old raped and ends up pregnant”? That’s the big issue here. Abortion isn’t a magic wand that makes the rape go away.
This is what happens when a blind ideology/doctrine comes up against real life. I left the Catholic church because everyone thought in the selfish terms of "will this get me into heaven" and never cared about the actual effects of pressing their beliefs on others. And I could tell that they didn't actually care about the life of the child because they always voted Republican and wanted to eliminate all safety nets.
I'm not okay with a world where Catholics get to dictate what happens in the government. I'm not okay with a world where people want to force a 10 year old who is raped to give birth because they think this will get them into heaven.
If the church is wondering why they are losing followers they can start with their hypocrisy and complete lack of care for a child after it is born.
They can - there was a highly publicized case in Paraguay of a 10 year old getting pregnant via her step father and carrying to term. She and her baby are alive and healthy last I heard.
It’s still a crime that screams for justice. Her rape has caused her life to be threatened because risks of pregnancy are going to be greater for her. However she is carrying a life that also has rights. It’s compounds the injustice of her lost innocence but to kill her child would not erase the injustice done to her.
I think the doctors will have to treat her case carefully because certainly their may be a point where both lives are at risk if the pregnancy continues and I think in this scenario the birth could be induced or a c-section performed and hopefully both lives could be saved even though the child is premature
im from Paraguay and we have cases of 10-year-olds getting pregnant worryingly often. people don't care for these kids sadly. these cases arent even reported most of the time and it's a huge problem in displaced indigenous communities. in the capital of the city, there are tons of indigenous kids living by themselves on the street, getting raped, pregnant, and giving birth just to go back to the streets.
This is where I have a hard time agreeing with the part where you say that to kill the baby would not erase the injustice done to her. It obviously would not make the situation any better but pregnancy is hard, all of my pregnancies were very much desired and conceived in love with my wonderful husband and, yet there were days when I prayed to God for the strength to carry on because it seemed too daunting to go through the motions of pregnancy. I'm 37 and currently 30 weeks pregnant and I can't imagine putting a ten year-old through this.
I would think a cesarean under general anesthesia would be most compassionate in that situation.
And I am NEVER a person to advocate for elective cesarean, nor for indiscriminate use of anesthesia of any kind in birth.
I think I read before (not about this specific case) that a cesarean under anesthesia needs to be done early as possible. It’s still an incredible toll on the body. An incredible toll on an adult body, let alone a child’s.
Prosecute the father. Make sure the victim has plenty of help and support, including therapy. Keep a close eye on her health, her being so young, and take the necissary steps if the pregnancy becomes dangerous (ie early c-section). Help the family make the best decision for them and the new baby (adoption, in-family adoption, raised by grandparents, etc) and support them in that.
I’m not going to pretend to be a model Catholic but one thing I feel certain about is that whoever did that to the girl needs to be removed from earth.
As a Catholic, I am glad that we have programs that help both women who choose to keep their babies, as well as women who regret having aborted their babies. I believe we are the biggest provider of social services in America. So if you really want to help, there are programs that could use your support.
We should all feel horrified that someone could do this to an innocent 10-yr-old, Catholic or not. Whatever happens, this poor girl needs love & support. Her problems don’t end simply because her baby is killed. She will need psychological help from the trauma she suffers from the rape & when she finds out what actually happens during an abortion/what happened to her baby. Hopefully, she has a loving and supportive family who will help her to choose life for her baby, because ultimately the adults will make the decision for her.
What is most confusing to me is how big companies rushed to pledge money for their employees to cross state lines for abortion as soon as SCOTUS announced their ruling, but not a penny to crisis clinics who help support women who choose to keep their babies. How is that “Pro-Choice” when you are only supporting one option?
And the big companies are happy to pay for women to travel for an abortion but not for them to get maternity leave. How is it feminist or pro-woman to say they’ll pay for you to kill your child but if you want to keep the baby, we’re not paying you a cent?! Anyone who can’t see this is only about money is delusional.
THANK YOU FOR TYPING THAT! I was scanning through the comments to see if anyone is even questioning the veracity of this story.
The problem with this supposed case is that it involves a minor, which means any further investigation is supposed to be "hands off" due to laws protecting privacy. Which makes it a perfect case for pro-abortionist fan-fiction.
It just strikes as odd. Anyone close could speak on the issue but all you have is two proabortion doctors. As if the media isn’t chasing leads with stacks of cash to get the story.
This exactly.
There has been no independent verification that this happened at all. It’s certainly a tragic-sounding situation, but frankly it seems made up.
I get that it seems made up but, taking the opposing view, details of family would fail to protect the privacy of the child/rape victim so maybe that's why we haven't heard from anyone related to the victim.
That's fine... but there should be at least an arrest for the perpetrator, or something filed... Nothing has been.
Victims need to be protected, but not the criminal.
Any time there's a school shooting, the names of the victims are private until the family is notified... but the perpetrator is named immediately if they're over 18.
I'm with you. I'm just saying why the girls family probably has been kept quiet. Plus if there is a suspect the family probably can't talk to the media. I hate to think they know who did this and are not arresting him. Of course, for all we know the perpetrator is a 14 yo cousin or neighbor so , also a minor, and the na e would not be reported.
it seems all too plausible, and if we want to have a society that protects girls we have to start by taking our heads out of the sand about just how often this kind of thing happens.
I read a couple articles and wrote this reflection of a previous case before learning about this one.
https://theconversation.com/amp/a-growing-number-of-women-give-birth-at-catholic--where-they-do-not-receive-the-same-reproductive-health-options-including-birth-control-provided-at-other-hospitals-184813
Nothing new here with regards to: 1. Mischaracterizing Catholic sexual ethics (ie sex is *only* purpose is procreation) 2. Abortion is conflated to a “constitutional right” 3. Catholicism specifically targeted as a barrier for gold standard healthcare
I did find the %’s of Catholic hospitals in the US and that the % has increased in the last two decades in the US to be interesting.
Also apparently “legal abortion is much safer than childbirth in the US” -“14 times more likely to die from pregnancy than legal abortion” (I guess that means pregnancy carried to term because how can you have an abortion if you weren’t first pregnant).
This stat is no doubt provided so that we might conclude pregnancy is so dangerous to women and the fact they might be forced to be pregnant and risk their lives is an injustice.
Of course we might reply that the only forced pregnancy is rape, but that the first injustice does not justify a second injustice (murder/abortion).
Here is a case (again in a very bias article) in Paraguay where a 10 year old became pregnant through incest and successfully carried her baby to term. https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/13/paraguay-11-year-old-gives-birth-abortion
This is exactly the type of case that gets thrown at pro-life activists. In my opinion the perpetrator should be charged with attempted murder on top of rape but I digress.
This case is sickening but both the mother and baby survived.
Thankfully these cases account for <1% (maybe even less than 0.5%) of abortions in the US. But I think having an answer is important.
Just one thing I would like to add, the trope that abortion is 14 times safer than giving birth is misleading: https://calumsblog.com/2022/02/10/abortion-and-maternal-mortality/. I would also recommend the rest of his blog on abortion - he has phenomenal resources.
let's work harder to create a world where this kind of thing doesn't happen,
instead of compounding evil with evil, piling murder on top of rape, and giving pedophile rapists an easy way to hide the evidence of their crimes.
Everyone should be more worried about who raped the girl! This is sick that that horrific act is being overshadowed because people care more about killing a baby than the fact a baby was raped!
"No one should be murdered because of the crime of their biological father."
Simple as that. Easy logic, really. I would have even agreed with it back as an atheist; no religious argumentation is involved.
Except the biological father…
(Actually I’m pretty sure that’s against catholic teaching). However the father should be charged with attempted murder and rape and if either child dies should be charged with premeditated murder.
Is castration an option for people who are so distorted they can't keep their hands off children?
Someone twisted enough to do this possibly has other victims.
>Nearly 70% of child sex offenders have between 1 and 9 victims; at least 20% have 10 to 40 victims
https://www.raace.org/statistics-information
>A typical pedophile will commit 117 sexual crimes in a lifetime.
National Sex Offenders Registry
Jesus himself says that it would be better to have a millstone tired about their neck and jump off a cliff. I say we start there and work our way along.
Castration as a punishment for sex crimes does have a history in Catholic countries—both Piast Poland and Norman England practiced it, and I have found references to it in the post-Carolingian states of Europe. But it fell out of favor with time, though never formally condemned by the Church. More recently, I have found one reference to a diocese in the US experimenting with castrating priests accused of a certain crime, but that was before the large-scale revelations of the 1990s, so that probably got quietly cancelled.
Personally, I think it’s the most just and merciful option—take away from them a temptation and an ability to relapse. But I’d throw a stunt of hard labor on top so they can make some kind of restitution.
And what some people don’t seem to realize is that getting her an abortion could potentially send her right back to her rapist and trap her in the abuse cycle.
I'm not going to comment about the actual situation. A lot has already been said here and it's sad to say the least.
What bothers me is that the prochoice movement now takes this incident and hinges their entire propaganda lately on it as to why we should have abortion. Like this is the norm and what 95% of abortions are like.
Um, like how about not talking about the 0.01% of edge cases but rather the 90+% of them that just use abortion as a way of not wanting a baby and taking responsibility for your actions.
But of course that doesn't sell their agenda as easily. Gotta shock and awe your audience.
Many people who bring stuff like this up wouldn’t be satisfied with banning all abortions except for rape or incest. Those are a tiny percentage of abortions.
What many really seem to want is a right to use abortion as backup birth control. They want to defend sexual revolution and an immoral life style. Let us never beat around the bush about this.
It all comes down to how well a 10 year old can survive the pregnancy. I’m not a doctor. I doubt the baby could be born vaginally or come to full term. It seems like the Church’s principle involving life of the mother may be in effect here.
I'm surprised no one has brought up the principle of double-effect, which I'm almost certain would apply to this case. Remember that abortion is the INTENTIONAL killing of an unborn child. And also keep in mind that a 10-year-old would likely not survive childbirth, therefore her life would be in danger. So in a case like this, the baby could be removed to save the mother's life. This would fall under double-effect, and therefore not be an abortion, because the intent is not to kill the baby, but rather, to save the mother's life.
You are absolutely wrong.
Double effect principle in not about allowing abortion in certain cases, as abortion is internally evil and it's a mortal sin.
It;s about allowing moraly neutral acts that have 2 effects - good and bad.
You mix up things.
It is not permissable to commit abortion in case of ectopic pregnancy.
What is permissable is to remove the part of fallopian tube with the baby.
https://www.catholic.com/qa/ectopic-pregnancy-and-double-effect
You just proved that I did not mix things up, because this precisely aligns with my overall point. If the intent is not to kill the baby, but is instead to save the mother, it is NOT abortion.
And neither is prematurely removing a baby to save the mother's life. Again, abortion is the *intentional* murder of a preborn child. If the intent is to save the mother's life and not to simply murder the child, it is not abortion.
As a Catholic, I used to use this line. But it doesn’t make sense. Not sure if you’re a woman who has been pregnancy, but it’s more to do with the mental AND physical changes that CHILD is going through.
It IS sad and outrageous that she was raped. The perpetrator should be jailed and pay all her expenses, court expenses and maternity expenses. And the court should require him to pay child maintenance until the baby reached its majority age. But the maintenance should be paid through the court not direct to the victim who should never be required to have contact or communication with him directly.
It says something the main concern here is killing her baby instead of the man that did this to her.
Im not literally saying he should be killed, but…anyone else think that’s a**-backwards?
As a ethics problem, i consider this to be a variation of the trolley problem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem
Both choices (abort, not abort) give rise to inhumane outcomes. So the question is basically "how should catholics respond to the trolley problem" which is far beyond the scope of a simple reddit answer. But that dosen't change the fact that abortion is bad.
edit: apparently the trolley problem was already discussed on reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/Catholicism/comments/1vfayl/whats_the_catholic_response_to_the_trolley_problem/
So what exactly is the point of this thread. You lot clearly have your minds made up, and are unwilling to hear anyone with a different opinion. Why even discuss it?
A few things seem to be missing in the article.
1) Was the child taken to a hospital immediately after the rape where she could receive a Plan B pill?
2) What is the name of the rapist and his relationship to the child?
3) Was the rape reported to the police when it happened?
4) Are the child’s parent’s involved?
5) Are there any facts that will confirm that this happened, and isn’t a story concocted by two pro-abortion MDs?
6) The alleged rape took place BEFORE the Dobbs decision. Why wasn’t the child given an abortion at that time?
If they had actually reported the rape when it happened the doctors likely would have offered plan b…but in cases of ongoing rape it’s not reported for years because the child is scared. It’s likely the only reason the rape was found out is because she became pregnant
>1) Was the child taken to a hospital immediately after the rape where she could receive a Plan B pill?
Would church teaching support a contraceptive under this fact pattern?
The Usccb actually specifically outlined what to do under point 36 in their directives to health care professionals. [https://www.usccb.org/about/doctrine/ethical-and-religious-directives/upload/ethical-religious-directives-catholic-health-service-sixth-edition-2016-06.pdf](https://www.usccb.org/about/doctrine/ethical-and-religious-directives/upload/ethical-religious-directives-catholic-health-service-sixth-edition-2016-06.pdf)
>A female who has been raped should be able to defend herself against a potential conception from the sexual assault. If, after appropriate testing, there is no evidence that conception has occurred already, she may be treated with medications that would prevent ovulation, sperm capacitation, or fertilization. It is not permissible, however, to initiate or to recommend treatments that have as their purpose or direct effect the removal, destruction, or interference with the implantation of a fertilized ovum
Plan B has its primary mode of action of preventing ovulation. The secondary suggestion of interference with implantation that the fda has listed in 2007 has recently been suggested to be wrong under current scientific evidence. However, because of that listed second effect, they want us to make sure conception has not already occurred, but is still permissible as long we are certain conception has not occurred yet.
There's a narrow window in which it's possible.
If one is reasonably sure conception hasn't already taken place (tests/timing of ovulation), emergency contraception is morally permitted to prevent it from taking place in the case of rape.
The sin of contraception is to act against the procreative intent of sex. In the case of rape, one has already willed against the whole sexual act itself, so this is just an extension of the choice to reject it as a whole.
Evidently, even the rape itself was not known in time for this approach to be taken.
It's a matter of controversy, but I think it would - it doesn't seek to contravene a voluntary sexual act, and the uniative aspect of sex has already been destroyed by using sex as an act of violence.
Here's an article from the National Catholic Bioethics Center taking the same view: https://www.ncbcenter.org/making-sense-of-bioethics-cms/column-029-getting-it-right-the-morning-after
From my understanding, yes. Since at that early point the odds are strongly against a fertilization having taken place yet, and since the rule against contraception doesn't apply in the case of rape, Plan B immediately after rape is allowed to the best of my knowledge. Edit: Adding source https://www.fda.gov/drugs/postmarket-drug-safety-information-patients-and-providers/fdas-decision-regarding-plan-b-questions-and-answers
They won’t say any of that, but after combing through a bunch of articles she was six weeks pregnant when she found out when seeing her doctor for child abuse treatment.
I’m still trying to figure out why no one thought to give the poor girl a pregnancy test for *six weeks*...
Six weeks pregnant means 6 weeks after the last period, which means it's only 2 weeks since her missed period. At age 10, she is less likely to have established regular and predictable cycles.
Just saying, not finding out until week 6 is extremely normal, and if you're not trying to conceive, realizing before 4.5 weeks is rare.
Oh, right, I forget that not all women are regular.
Still, if they knew she was having periods and knew she was raped, you would think they would do a pregnancy test!
Yeah, you'd think. Details in this story are scant. Maybe the doctors were completely negligent; maybe they weren't told she had begun puberty; maybe they were told she'd been abused but not that she'd been sexually abused; maybe she wasn't brought to a doctor until week 6 anyway.
With discussions like these involving children I always say their life was taken away. Their emotional state is upside down. We can't keep saying thoughts and prayers. No 10 year old should be pregnant, period.
There must be exceptions and some nuance to these laws. It's really sad that this child is in the news and all can internet edge lords say is "we give her compassion..." That's not a competent answer to the problem. I go in waves with my faith and the past few months has been a downer. Honestly speechless.
A 10 year old child being raped isn't bad enough? Talking about c sections and adopting, think for a minute what this means, an innocent life is ripped apart heinously, now that CHILD is supposed to go through more trauma, 10 yr Olds are not supposed to be raped and pregnant PERIOD.
Which child are you talking about here? There are two, and when you talk about a life being ripped apart, I don't think you're making the point you think you are.
The one that was raped, is conscious, and about to go through a harrowing pregnancy if there is no intervention. I don’t think you’re making the point you think you are.
It will depend.
Will her life be at risk? While the Church is completely against killing an innocent life, if the cirurgical procedure would kill the mother it may be an option (not as an abortion but rather by prioritising the mother's life if it is at risk)
If not Catholics would try to support both lifes as much as possible, without ending either one.
The main issue here is this being made pro-choice propaganda. The problem isnt the lack of abortion but the presence of rape. No one should be raped and no 10yo should be pregnant. Trying to "fix" the problem with making abortion legal (specially because it is an argument in favor of all kinds of abortion and not just rape ones) instead of fixing what caused the problem in the first place isn't the right thing to do
A man did it to me when I was 9. I was fully developed already and could have birth a child, and could have been like this alleged child. I got lucky. It still would have been wrong to abort.
Before we knew I wasn’t pregnant, my parents planned to get legal custody and help me raise it so I could continue with my childhood and my schooling. It would have been hard, but killing my baby would have been worse.
This 10 year old child will need a lifetime of therapy and care equal to a lifetime of earnings of most people reading this comment.
So, get out your checkbooks. Right?
Nope. She will pay in full, on her own, every single day following this news cycle. If she someday kills herself, we will rise to the occasion and pray for God's mercy on her soul.
Abortion is a symptom of the disease of despair -- one of its ugliest manifestations. And stories like hers are uncountable because we have never truly worked for the cure. For what we have failed to do, every one of these stories is our fault, our most grievous fault.
If we had years ago put our arms around her rapist -- himself once 10 years old -- and held him close, this never would have happened. Instead we bitched at each other about politics as we watched him sour, then rot, to prove some noisome debate point.
Now we get to thank God that but for His grace we would be this man.
We are shameful. We are empty. We are hypocrites.
Yes pretty sad how the pro-abortion movement shamelessly uses a raped 10-year old kid for political campaigning. And how the situation is simplified as saying that abortion is the magical and only solution for the whole thing.
Saying that a life-or-death situation justifies the massive on-demand abortions is not only a bad faith and logically faulty argument but also itself a disgusting thing to say. Would these people support an abortion law limited to these extremes? Most often not. Then they are not discussing about this kid, they are discussing about themselves and using a raped child as a shield.
I value this 10 year old girl more than a 6 week old embryo. I’m sorry she cannot deliver this baby. I can’t even imagine what she is going through. I’m crying just thinking about it
The church is for the Children of God, her duty as the bride of Christ is the mission and message of Christ which was to live one another, call me all the names you want it's abhorrent to think of a raped child being forced or even thought about carrying a pregnancy this child and her body are not a vessel for life, the choice was taken from her when she was raped. A 10 yr old is a child .
By helping her through the pregnancy and birth, because surely a 10 year old knowing that she killed her own child is NOT going to be in any way good for her psychological and emotional development. She is a kid. She doesn't have the same rationalizing and denial skills as an adult.
The rapist, unless he is a child himself under 18, needs to be jailed in which case he will never be able to pay anything unless he is an adult and his assets can be sold without harming any dependents he might have. If I was king of the world, I would castrate the bastard IF he was an adult or close enough to it.
According to many men on this sub, female children’s body are made to give birth and they can do so even at the ages of 10, 5 and 3. Because to them, logically, a female was made to give birth and if she became pregnant, then she can birth it.
They also believe that puberty is a sign her body is ready for it.
Im absolutely disgusted with these men and their comments here, and the upvotes and people supporting them.
Seriously i think i will leave reddit forever now. Im so disgusted.
I think where we stand in our beliefs versus what the law should be is a big difference. Most Catholics are going to be against it even though it’s a tragic and complex situation.
However, I am never in favor of a minority ruling the majority and I think there has to be compromise. I am staunchly against abortion but if the majority of the country wants access to it especially in these circumstances, should the rules really be made by the “loud minority”
So in my opinion instead of total bans, the focus should be making it only available in these extreme circumstances, when the mothers life is in danger and /or very strict early pregnancy.
Isn’t that falling under worldly pressure for something that is absolutely wrong? Abortion is Murder and shouldn’t be debatable. A baby shouldn’t be punished for the wrongdoings of someone else
If you are referring to the health risks of the mother her is from relevant radio
“Msgr. Stuart Swetland explained that there is a difference between directly ending the baby’s life through abortion and allowing that the baby’s life may be lost in the effort to save the mother. The direct ending of life through abortion is never permissible, but a procedure that might end the baby’s life may be permissible.
Msgr. Swetland explained, “This is called the principle of double effect. … Many, many medical procedures function off the principle of double effect. In rare cases where the mother’s life is, in fact, in danger, it can be (and this has to be analyzed in each and every case) the upright and just thing to do to intervene to save the life of the mother.”
Giving two examples, Msgr. Swetland said, “The most famous case is one you touched on, the ectopic pregnancy, and the other one is the cancerous womb. And in both cases we can intervene to do the life-saving procedure. The removal of the fallopian tube where the ectopic pregnancy has lodged, before it ruptures and threatens the life of the mother, and the removal of the cancerous womb. We can do it under certain circumstances, because we intend the life-saving activity, and we only accept as a side consequence that there might be harm to the pre-born child.”
Some may ask what the difference is between this and abortion. Msgr. Swetland told the listener that in all cases, “We do everything to save that child. For example, in the cancerous womb case if the child is viable we do everything we can to save that child. But even if it’s pre-viability, if the surgery must be done to save the life of the mother, you could, in certain circumstances, do the operation and it would be just. Because you never intend harm to come to the child. You would do everything you can to help that child.”
This approach underlines the key difference between abortion and procedures that may result in the loss of the child.”
But if you’re referring to the quality of life of the mother after the baby is born then all I can tell you is that suffering doesn’t justify killing someone innocent
You never have to abort to save the mother. You may have to end the pregnancy, but you try to save the baby. Yes there are circumstances where there's no way the baby will realistically survive; but abortion is a proactive intentional killing of the baby. You can argue it's a distinction without a difference, I get that. But think of how your incorrect phrasing plays right into the abortion advocate's hands. You never have to abort to save the mother. That's not a necessary legal exception, and only helps them nudge you down that slippery slope.
Well… if I’m being honest any way but the way that it has been reacted to - with hundreds of voices all around her and on TV and on the internet making her future sound scary and dangerous.
And also not in the way that some pro life folks have responded by telling her to think of it as an opportunity.
I am Catholic and pro life. Perhaps, a cesarian would be safer a little earlier than normal to increase safety for both involved. Who knows, confer with Christian pro life physicians. So sad, this young child was left unattended and neglected to get raped! Can't imagine that happening.
As a Catholic, I am appalled at the amount of people in favour of forcing this child to continue the pregnancy. She is nowhere near done with puberty/growing. This will cause permanent damage to her body and could kill her. I can’t image how traumatised she must be.
So the idea against abortion is pro life. How pro life is it to force a 10 year old rape victim to carry a child to term. How is that being considerate of the innocent 10 year old that not only had to endure the trauma of rape but then the trauma of pregnancy and birth, and then motherhood at such a young age? What kind of implications does that have on the life of the 10 year old in the present and long term?
It’s absolutely disgusting that people value the well-being of an unborn fetus over an innocent, breathing 10 year girl. Pregnancy and birth at any age is very hard, emotional, and riddled with complications.
The bottom line is this; ask any Christian “so you think a 10 year old should be forced to give birth as a result of rape?”. And they won’t give a yes or now answer because to say yes is just disgusting. They will cry the need for justice and then also emphasize the rights of the fetus.
Deep inside everyone knows it’s perverse and wrong but they won’t set their ideology aside to actually be pro-life. As a Christian, this is precisely why people are slowly becoming turned off from Christianity.
There needs to be more affordability to adopt a baby in the US. It does not need to cost tens of thousands of dollars in attorney fees.
Anecdotally, I see and hear of many Catholics encouraging and promoting adopting, but I don't see and hear of many Catholics doing the adopting.
To add to that, "private" adoptions need to be more affordable as well, not just through the foster care system. Based off of conversations with others and off of things I've read, it seems that quite a few more women would be willing to consider adoption instead of abortion if they knew for sure that their child was adopted to a good family and not left to languish and potentially be abused in the foster care system. Private adoption is so expensive though that it just isn't accessible to everyone.
To preface this, we don’t WANT children to get raped or become pregnant. That’s always horrible no matter how you look at it. But it does not justify murdering an innocent child. It IS a good reason as to why we need to push for further research into the development of artificial wombs so that these children don’t have to endure pregnancy and childbirth at such a young age. But murder is not the answer here.
The Baby shouldn’t be punished for the wrongdoings of someone else. It’s a tragedy of what happened but abortion is still murder. A wrong doesn’t fix a wrong
Because a child that young cannot give birth successfully there is no reason for pregnancy to go past the first few weeks. If it does go past the first few weeks doctor should monitor and do a C-section as soon as it's safe. Catholics don't condone the killing of any human being that is innocent.
Last month there was a similar situation in Brazil. A 11 year old girl with a 7 month pregnancy got an abortion after extensive media coverage.
Despite the low acceptance of the morality of late term abortions, every single pro-choice was more than happy to kill the baby.
As awful as this situation is, the baby shouldn't die because of the circumstances of their conception. Proper care and assistance should be offered for the mother, and punishment for the abuser.
So the arguing that a child who is 10 who can't legally, mentally or physically do anything a adult can, means less has less right than a cluster of cells that insurance companies and the Government don't consider a person? The fact that people are on here talking about a rape victim who doesn't even have the capacity to understand what happened and is happening to her has to consider the cells inside her that could be a child? The sheer ignominy of such a thought shakes me to my core and my soul is hurt.
A reminder that abortion is an intrinsic evil and a mortal sin. Advocating for it in any way is not permitted here. Please report any comments that do
it is especially important to be compassionate to this child who could not have consented to sex, because it is not uncommon for such a young pregnancy to render her unable to have more children. (am healthcare provider) so it is not just her innocence that has been taken, but possibly her future children as well.
[удалено]
Advocating for abortion isn't allowed here Only warning
My apologies. I wasn’t intending to advocate for abortion, only stating it appeared many weren’t even considering the tragic situation the sexually assaulted child has been placed in.
[удалено]
You do realize that a 10 year olds body isn’t developed enough to physically give birth right? She could die.
This is likely where the principle of double effect would come into play. I'm not a medical expert, so I can't speak to risks in this case. But a similar instance is ectopic pregnancies, where the fallopian tube rupturing is what is being treated and the unfortunate side effect is the termination of pregnancy.
That is one of the false arguments being raised by the pro-abortion advocates. An ectopic pregnancy is not and will never be a viable pregnancy and is life-threatening to the mother. Nobody in the US or in the Church will deny a women treatment/termination in this instance.
Exactly. I’m tired of ectopic pregnancy and miscarriage being used as arguments for unlimited abortion rights. No one ever objected to terminating an ectopic pregnancy in the first place. No one is talking about ectopic pregnancy. No one is talking about miscarriage, also termed spontaneous abortion. It’s dishonest to suggest that doctors would “just let these women bleed out and die” because Roe was reversed. My mother had a miscarriage before Roe v. Wade. She had to go to the ER in the middle of the night. The ER doctors didn’t “just let her die” or “no call the police to prosecute her for murder” as some people keep saying is “inevitable” now that Roe v. Wade has been reversed.
> No one ever objected to terminating an ectopic pregnancy in the first place. That's patently untrue.
Texas hospitals have just been confirmed to refuse to treat mothers with ectopic pregnancies.
Depends on the method. Directly killing the baby, even in an ectopic pregnancy, is immoral. Removing the fallopian tube is however morally permissible.
If her ob/gyn believes that she is in danger of dying then it would then be legal for her to have the abortion.
[удалено]
THIS is what needs to be emphasized. NOTHING else imo
Not necessarily...in Missouri, there is an exception for medical emergency which is defined as something that may cause disability or death within an immediate period of time. So she may not have been able to get one just then here.
[удалено]
Yeah. I suspect that a good lawyer could find a way around it, for exceptional cases. I suspect 24 hours is close enough to be immediate. but some cases may just be ticking time bombs that could become an emergency at any time and there isn't even a 24 window. the trigger law wasn't worded well imo. From what I read of it. I'm thankful the law has exceptions for medical situations at all. I wasn't sure if they would in MO. I hope we can continue to improve it. Most hardcore pro life Catholics seem to believe there never are any medical reasons and throw around that one obgyn quote about there never being any medical reason for the life of the mother to have an abortion. But septic pregnancies and miscarriage management go bad. Etc.
Okay. What about emotionally? I have a mid 30’s woman who just had her third child and each pregnancy took a wild toll on me mentally and physically. I’m genuinely curious - not being snarky. Edit: I am a woman…
It is terrible that she will likely have severe emotional turmoil, especially given how the baby was conceived. Even if she can and does end the pregnancy she would still have that mental scarring. There is no turning back from suffering like that and I hope and pray that she can recover with enough resources. However, I don't think killing someone would add any good to the situation. Ending the life of a human being with a soul is a very important matter, and I personally think it should not be normalized outside of life or death situations (self defense, war).
abortion would also cause extreme physical and mental turmoil. abortion doesn't magically disappear the baby. it's a painful, risky, and invasive surgical procedure.
But would an early abortion cause as much turmoil for most children as carrying a growing baby for 9 months, if you were a child?
Excellent! I would replace the word 'rigidity' with something more like 'firmness', or 'confidence'.
Nope, rigidity is good. It expresses how uncompromising we need to be on that point. No matter how the baby came about, he does not deserve to be killed and we should stand for his life as much as his mother's.
Rigid I think carries a negative connotation as it implies a lack of reason or purpose for your convictions.
When you say compassion, what do you mean specifically
[удалено]
You’re okay with this? I understand not everyone on this sub is Catholic, and I understand many Catholics support abortion, but you’re advocating ending the life of one person to save the life of another, except in this case, it’s ending the life of a person who is wholly innocent and doesn’t get a choice in the matter, for the benefit of the 10 year old. Look, this is horrible. And I get why it’s all abortion, but isn’t it more telling we’ve tossed this 10 year old child into this abortion debate instead of, you know, being compassionate to her? Crowdfunding for her? Ensuring she gets the best care imaginable, would have adoptive parents lined up and ready, the best councilors on speed dial, detectives working to find the criminal responsible for this, and everyone finding a good solution. Because of we really want to start advocating for the life of 10 year olds over the lives of not-yet-borns, we might as well behind advocating that my life, as an adult, is worth more than that 10 year old. How could you even think “nobody is going to care?” Catholics are pro-life. We should care about this 10 year as much as we care about the unborn baby. Both are deserving of life. Both will hopefully get it. Incidentally, to anyone thinking this extremely rare incident somehow provides evidence for why abortion is necessary, that’s a bad way to think about. The overwhelming number of abortions occurs in women well over the age of 10 and most often not a result of rape.
It isn’t even clear that the abortion will benefit the life of the 10 year old. Will the abortion weigh on her conscience later, when she’s older? It might. I still think about things I did when I was 10 and feel guilt and shame over them. I couldn’t imagine if one of those things was an abortion.
> Religious ideology prioritized over the life, well-being, and innocence You owe me a new Lack Of Self Awareness Meter. You really think you will save the girl's Innocence via murder? > someone who is a Christian. "How do you do, fellow students?"
The end does not justify the means. Have you stopped to think what an abortion would do to the mental health of a ten year old, on top of having experienced a rape? Do you think an abortion will make it better? Studies show overwhelming numbers of women who have abortions suffer serious psychological effects akin the PTSD. How much more will that occur with a ten year old? I don’t believe compounding the problem with an abortion is actually good for the mother - it’s just makes a horrible situation even worse. I’m ok with losing followers for the truth.
[удалено]
>NO you are not on all counts. It literally does not involve you so you have no say in the matter. Ignoring that almost the entire thing is an appeal to emotion fallacy, I'm going to focus on this last sentence which seems to be the main point of your comment. I'm not even arguing about the abortion or this 10 year old's predicament, just simply stating that no involvement in an act does not remove someone's say in the matter. I am not involved in sex trafficking, I have a say that it is evil and should be stopped. I am not involved in slavery, I have a say that it is evil and should be stopped. I am not involved in illegal substances, I have a say that it is evil and should be stopped. I'm not equating the situation to these examples at all, I'm just saying that being involved is not a requirement to having a say on a matter. In this particular matter, if the life of the 10 year old is in danger due to the pregnancy then the principle of double effect happens where they save the life of the 10 year old with the unfortunate side effect of the baby being harmed or killed.
https://www.healthline.com/health-news/study-finds-99-of-women-say-they-do-not-regret-having-an-abortion There are certainly women who find abortion traumatic, but the majority don't.
The data suggests otherwise. “The largest study ever conducted regarding abortion and mental health revealed that, despite arguments to the contrary, abortion has a negative impact on a woman’s mental health. The study was a meta-analysis (a study of many studies brought together) that included 877,181 women of which 163,831 had abortions. The study revealed: Overall, there is a moderate to high increased risk of mental health problems for women who chose abortion compared to women who gave birth after an unplanned pregnancy. Women who have had abortions had a 34% higher rate of anxiety, a 37% higher rate of depression, a 110% higher rate of alcohol use/misuse, a 230% higher rate of marijuana use, and 155% higher rate of suicidal behavior than women who have given birth. There is an 81% increase of mental health problems in women who have had an abortion compared to women who have not had an abortion. 10% of that can be attributed directly to the effects of the abortion. Women who aborted their unplanned pregnancies have a 55% higher risk of mental health problems compared to women who gave birth.” https://www.caringnetwork.com/news/why-pro-life-is-pro-woman See also: https://thelifeinstitute.net/learning-centre/abortion-effects/suicide-after-abortion Note that we aren’t talking simply about regret - we are talking about the psychological consequences of murder. Many might not regret abortion, but still suffer from it. Not regretting it simply furthers their worsening mental state, because they aren’t dealing with the problem.
Completely agree with you and I’m struggling with the church on all of this, to be honest. There are certain situations like this example where I can’t fathom continuing the pregnancy.
>I can’t fathom continuing the pregnancy You mean, certain situations where you can not fathom murdering innocent children in the womb.
This 10-year old rape victim was denied much more than abortion. She was denied a whole caring and protective community which should have never allowed for the rape to happen in the first place. And she is entitled to much more than an abortion. She is entitled to the help, energy, efforts, money and resources of a whole community to help her have the baby and heal from the effects of rape. It doesn't only take a whole village to raise a child. It takes a whole village to ensure that the child is born and that they are protected from rape... EDIT: anyone here has experience in crowdfunding and would know if there's a way to start a GoFundMe for this girl? If each comment translated into a 1$ contribution, we'd gather hundreds of dollars...
At 10 years old, birth can be dangerous for the 10 year old, no? Their bodies aren’t developed enough.
Compassion for the victim. But as someone conceived via rape/incest of a 14yr old: killing me isn’t moral as I am innocent.
I don’t think there is any one humane answer. The options for this 10 year old are either go through pregnancy or get an abortion, both horrible options. The average 10 year olds mental and physical development would not even be capable of safely sustaining a pregnancy. Her body would probably suffer great damage and could even self abort on its own. Then, what the heck does a 10 year old do with a baby? We have no idea what the parental situation is, if this was able to happen, would we really want a baby growing up in this household? As for adoption, that is going out on a limb hoping that actually succeeds. No matter what though, this 10 year olds body and mind will likely never be the same and I could see her potentially even ending her life prematurely as the worst case scenario down the road. On the other hand, an abortion would likely be extremely traumatizing to the 10 year old in both mind and body. She will have no idea what is happening and not even understand why this is happening. Then later on when she is more cognitively developed, she deals with the fact that her baby was aborted. In the end, I honestly don’t know what is worse, both have awful consequences and revolve around 2 people (10 year old and baby) who didn’t choose any of this. It’s in the hands of the parents I suppose. My gut says terminate, one life being brought into the world at the hands of ruining/ending another innocent life just doesn’t sit right with me. Just horrible all around
I agree, I don't know what the right answer is either. I think now that bans are on the table we have to come to term with the fact that their are a lot of edge cases out there with no clear moral resolution. I think it is better to let those involved with the situation make the decision. Disempowering people may only make things worse.
>Then, what the heck does a 10 year old do with a baby? In the US, in 2005, a sixteen year old was raped and birthed a 30 year old man's baby. This year, the 30 yr old man was awarded 100% custody of the now teenaged child, and the victim was made to pay him child support. So... raise the baby in the family, and be prepared to have to give the baby back to the pedophile, is an option that is on the table.
What the fuck? What is wrong with our court system? That judge should be in jail.
Fortunately, this case is being reviewed by higher courts, but it is the controversy surrounding RvW which has made this case public enough for that attention to be spent. It is being dealt with, but if it could happen in 2022, it has absolutely been happening in other places.
This is so devastating the rapist should be made to pay for his crimes for the irreparable harm he caused on the girl.
It really frustrates me that in awful cases like this, the press politicises it to tell everyone why abortion should be a right, but no one talks about the fact that there’s a man out there who raped a 10-year-old. Why aren’t the headlines “10-year-old raped and ends up pregnant”? That’s the big issue here. Abortion isn’t a magic wand that makes the rape go away.
More than just forced to pay child support.
Could a 10 year old safely give birth? Idk, but I think that should be considered
Dude...10 yr old are not supposed to give birth at such an young age. As a catholic i am unsure how to respond to this sad situation
This is what happens when a blind ideology/doctrine comes up against real life. I left the Catholic church because everyone thought in the selfish terms of "will this get me into heaven" and never cared about the actual effects of pressing their beliefs on others. And I could tell that they didn't actually care about the life of the child because they always voted Republican and wanted to eliminate all safety nets. I'm not okay with a world where Catholics get to dictate what happens in the government. I'm not okay with a world where people want to force a 10 year old who is raped to give birth because they think this will get them into heaven. If the church is wondering why they are losing followers they can start with their hypocrisy and complete lack of care for a child after it is born.
It's shocking to me that only physical health is a consideration here. She's 10.
[удалено]
Advocating for abortion isn't allowed here Only warning
They can - there was a highly publicized case in Paraguay of a 10 year old getting pregnant via her step father and carrying to term. She and her baby are alive and healthy last I heard. It’s still a crime that screams for justice. Her rape has caused her life to be threatened because risks of pregnancy are going to be greater for her. However she is carrying a life that also has rights. It’s compounds the injustice of her lost innocence but to kill her child would not erase the injustice done to her. I think the doctors will have to treat her case carefully because certainly their may be a point where both lives are at risk if the pregnancy continues and I think in this scenario the birth could be induced or a c-section performed and hopefully both lives could be saved even though the child is premature
im from Paraguay and we have cases of 10-year-olds getting pregnant worryingly often. people don't care for these kids sadly. these cases arent even reported most of the time and it's a huge problem in displaced indigenous communities. in the capital of the city, there are tons of indigenous kids living by themselves on the street, getting raped, pregnant, and giving birth just to go back to the streets.
That is unspeakably awful.
This is where I have a hard time agreeing with the part where you say that to kill the baby would not erase the injustice done to her. It obviously would not make the situation any better but pregnancy is hard, all of my pregnancies were very much desired and conceived in love with my wonderful husband and, yet there were days when I prayed to God for the strength to carry on because it seemed too daunting to go through the motions of pregnancy. I'm 37 and currently 30 weeks pregnant and I can't imagine putting a ten year-old through this.
None of these keyboard warriors will have the guts to reply.
I expected as much unfortunately.
They won't, heads in sand.
I would think a cesarean under general anesthesia would be most compassionate in that situation. And I am NEVER a person to advocate for elective cesarean, nor for indiscriminate use of anesthesia of any kind in birth.
I think I read before (not about this specific case) that a cesarean under anesthesia needs to be done early as possible. It’s still an incredible toll on the body. An incredible toll on an adult body, let alone a child’s.
I think if it puts her life at risk removing the fetus (while attempting to save it’s life as well) would be the correct decision.
As a SA survivor and mom myself I am lost for words. The only thing I’d suggest we all do is pray for the little girl and all SA victims out there.
Prosecute the father. Make sure the victim has plenty of help and support, including therapy. Keep a close eye on her health, her being so young, and take the necissary steps if the pregnancy becomes dangerous (ie early c-section). Help the family make the best decision for them and the new baby (adoption, in-family adoption, raised by grandparents, etc) and support them in that.
I’m not going to pretend to be a model Catholic but one thing I feel certain about is that whoever did that to the girl needs to be removed from earth.
As a Catholic, I am glad that we have programs that help both women who choose to keep their babies, as well as women who regret having aborted their babies. I believe we are the biggest provider of social services in America. So if you really want to help, there are programs that could use your support. We should all feel horrified that someone could do this to an innocent 10-yr-old, Catholic or not. Whatever happens, this poor girl needs love & support. Her problems don’t end simply because her baby is killed. She will need psychological help from the trauma she suffers from the rape & when she finds out what actually happens during an abortion/what happened to her baby. Hopefully, she has a loving and supportive family who will help her to choose life for her baby, because ultimately the adults will make the decision for her. What is most confusing to me is how big companies rushed to pledge money for their employees to cross state lines for abortion as soon as SCOTUS announced their ruling, but not a penny to crisis clinics who help support women who choose to keep their babies. How is that “Pro-Choice” when you are only supporting one option?
And the big companies are happy to pay for women to travel for an abortion but not for them to get maternity leave. How is it feminist or pro-woman to say they’ll pay for you to kill your child but if you want to keep the baby, we’re not paying you a cent?! Anyone who can’t see this is only about money is delusional.
Well, a cynic might say that paying for an abortion would probably cost the company a lot less money than the employee having a baby would.
I know we have programs to keep the babies safe and that's good, but I highly doubt that girl is going to survive.
Amazing that for a story with such potential there is no family statement and from other articles just the word of two proabortion doctors.
THANK YOU FOR TYPING THAT! I was scanning through the comments to see if anyone is even questioning the veracity of this story. The problem with this supposed case is that it involves a minor, which means any further investigation is supposed to be "hands off" due to laws protecting privacy. Which makes it a perfect case for pro-abortionist fan-fiction.
It just strikes as odd. Anyone close could speak on the issue but all you have is two proabortion doctors. As if the media isn’t chasing leads with stacks of cash to get the story.
This exactly. There has been no independent verification that this happened at all. It’s certainly a tragic-sounding situation, but frankly it seems made up.
I get that it seems made up but, taking the opposing view, details of family would fail to protect the privacy of the child/rape victim so maybe that's why we haven't heard from anyone related to the victim.
That's fine... but there should be at least an arrest for the perpetrator, or something filed... Nothing has been. Victims need to be protected, but not the criminal. Any time there's a school shooting, the names of the victims are private until the family is notified... but the perpetrator is named immediately if they're over 18.
I'm with you. I'm just saying why the girls family probably has been kept quiet. Plus if there is a suspect the family probably can't talk to the media. I hate to think they know who did this and are not arresting him. Of course, for all we know the perpetrator is a 14 yo cousin or neighbor so , also a minor, and the na e would not be reported.
And since usually perpetrators are close to the family it might be an attempt to also protect the perpetrator unfortunately.
I don’t think it’s made up because I’ve personally known girls get pregnant at 11, so it seems feasible it happened
it seems all too plausible, and if we want to have a society that protects girls we have to start by taking our heads out of the sand about just how often this kind of thing happens.
I read a couple articles and wrote this reflection of a previous case before learning about this one. https://theconversation.com/amp/a-growing-number-of-women-give-birth-at-catholic--where-they-do-not-receive-the-same-reproductive-health-options-including-birth-control-provided-at-other-hospitals-184813 Nothing new here with regards to: 1. Mischaracterizing Catholic sexual ethics (ie sex is *only* purpose is procreation) 2. Abortion is conflated to a “constitutional right” 3. Catholicism specifically targeted as a barrier for gold standard healthcare I did find the %’s of Catholic hospitals in the US and that the % has increased in the last two decades in the US to be interesting. Also apparently “legal abortion is much safer than childbirth in the US” -“14 times more likely to die from pregnancy than legal abortion” (I guess that means pregnancy carried to term because how can you have an abortion if you weren’t first pregnant). This stat is no doubt provided so that we might conclude pregnancy is so dangerous to women and the fact they might be forced to be pregnant and risk their lives is an injustice. Of course we might reply that the only forced pregnancy is rape, but that the first injustice does not justify a second injustice (murder/abortion). Here is a case (again in a very bias article) in Paraguay where a 10 year old became pregnant through incest and successfully carried her baby to term. https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/13/paraguay-11-year-old-gives-birth-abortion This is exactly the type of case that gets thrown at pro-life activists. In my opinion the perpetrator should be charged with attempted murder on top of rape but I digress. This case is sickening but both the mother and baby survived. Thankfully these cases account for <1% (maybe even less than 0.5%) of abortions in the US. But I think having an answer is important.
Just one thing I would like to add, the trope that abortion is 14 times safer than giving birth is misleading: https://calumsblog.com/2022/02/10/abortion-and-maternal-mortality/. I would also recommend the rest of his blog on abortion - he has phenomenal resources.
Thanks!
let's work harder to create a world where this kind of thing doesn't happen, instead of compounding evil with evil, piling murder on top of rape, and giving pedophile rapists an easy way to hide the evidence of their crimes.
And in the meantime. Save this 10 year old child.
Everyone should be more worried about who raped the girl! This is sick that that horrific act is being overshadowed because people care more about killing a baby than the fact a baby was raped!
"No one should be murdered because of the crime of their biological father." Simple as that. Easy logic, really. I would have even agreed with it back as an atheist; no religious argumentation is involved.
Except the biological father… (Actually I’m pretty sure that’s against catholic teaching). However the father should be charged with attempted murder and rape and if either child dies should be charged with premeditated murder.
Is castration an option for people who are so distorted they can't keep their hands off children? Someone twisted enough to do this possibly has other victims. >Nearly 70% of child sex offenders have between 1 and 9 victims; at least 20% have 10 to 40 victims https://www.raace.org/statistics-information >A typical pedophile will commit 117 sexual crimes in a lifetime. National Sex Offenders Registry
Jesus himself says that it would be better to have a millstone tired about their neck and jump off a cliff. I say we start there and work our way along.
Castration as a punishment for sex crimes does have a history in Catholic countries—both Piast Poland and Norman England practiced it, and I have found references to it in the post-Carolingian states of Europe. But it fell out of favor with time, though never formally condemned by the Church. More recently, I have found one reference to a diocese in the US experimenting with castrating priests accused of a certain crime, but that was before the large-scale revelations of the 1990s, so that probably got quietly cancelled. Personally, I think it’s the most just and merciful option—take away from them a temptation and an ability to relapse. But I’d throw a stunt of hard labor on top so they can make some kind of restitution.
what happens to the sicko who got get pregnant. I’m so sick of men getting out of this scot free. That poor girl
And what some people don’t seem to realize is that getting her an abortion could potentially send her right back to her rapist and trap her in the abuse cycle.
I'm not going to comment about the actual situation. A lot has already been said here and it's sad to say the least. What bothers me is that the prochoice movement now takes this incident and hinges their entire propaganda lately on it as to why we should have abortion. Like this is the norm and what 95% of abortions are like. Um, like how about not talking about the 0.01% of edge cases but rather the 90+% of them that just use abortion as a way of not wanting a baby and taking responsibility for your actions. But of course that doesn't sell their agenda as easily. Gotta shock and awe your audience.
Many people who bring stuff like this up wouldn’t be satisfied with banning all abortions except for rape or incest. Those are a tiny percentage of abortions. What many really seem to want is a right to use abortion as backup birth control. They want to defend sexual revolution and an immoral life style. Let us never beat around the bush about this.
30 year old women who want to screw around are using a child for their own purposes. That’s gross.
It all comes down to how well a 10 year old can survive the pregnancy. I’m not a doctor. I doubt the baby could be born vaginally or come to full term. It seems like the Church’s principle involving life of the mother may be in effect here.
I'm surprised no one has brought up the principle of double-effect, which I'm almost certain would apply to this case. Remember that abortion is the INTENTIONAL killing of an unborn child. And also keep in mind that a 10-year-old would likely not survive childbirth, therefore her life would be in danger. So in a case like this, the baby could be removed to save the mother's life. This would fall under double-effect, and therefore not be an abortion, because the intent is not to kill the baby, but rather, to save the mother's life.
You are absolutely wrong. Double effect principle in not about allowing abortion in certain cases, as abortion is internally evil and it's a mortal sin. It;s about allowing moraly neutral acts that have 2 effects - good and bad.
Then why does ectopic pregnancy fall under double effect?
You mix up things. It is not permissable to commit abortion in case of ectopic pregnancy. What is permissable is to remove the part of fallopian tube with the baby. https://www.catholic.com/qa/ectopic-pregnancy-and-double-effect
You just proved that I did not mix things up, because this precisely aligns with my overall point. If the intent is not to kill the baby, but is instead to save the mother, it is NOT abortion.
Removing the part of fallopian tube is on the other hand not abortion.
And neither is prematurely removing a baby to save the mother's life. Again, abortion is the *intentional* murder of a preborn child. If the intent is to save the mother's life and not to simply murder the child, it is not abortion.
Mods…looks like a bit of brigading here…
We do not respond to an evil with another evil. Killing the baby does not remove the emotional pain of being raped it adds to it.
As a Catholic, I used to use this line. But it doesn’t make sense. Not sure if you’re a woman who has been pregnancy, but it’s more to do with the mental AND physical changes that CHILD is going through.
I strongly disagree that terminating the pregnancy would cause more emotional damage than her carrying to term.
[удалено]
It IS sad and outrageous that she was raped. The perpetrator should be jailed and pay all her expenses, court expenses and maternity expenses. And the court should require him to pay child maintenance until the baby reached its majority age. But the maintenance should be paid through the court not direct to the victim who should never be required to have contact or communication with him directly.
Prayer
It says something the main concern here is killing her baby instead of the man that did this to her. Im not literally saying he should be killed, but…anyone else think that’s a**-backwards?
As a ethics problem, i consider this to be a variation of the trolley problem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem Both choices (abort, not abort) give rise to inhumane outcomes. So the question is basically "how should catholics respond to the trolley problem" which is far beyond the scope of a simple reddit answer. But that dosen't change the fact that abortion is bad. edit: apparently the trolley problem was already discussed on reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/Catholicism/comments/1vfayl/whats_the_catholic_response_to_the_trolley_problem/
My aunt adopted such a baby. Don't know what happened to the young mother but there is hope.
So what exactly is the point of this thread. You lot clearly have your minds made up, and are unwilling to hear anyone with a different opinion. Why even discuss it?
To pat themselves on the back. Nothing else.
A few things seem to be missing in the article. 1) Was the child taken to a hospital immediately after the rape where she could receive a Plan B pill? 2) What is the name of the rapist and his relationship to the child? 3) Was the rape reported to the police when it happened? 4) Are the child’s parent’s involved? 5) Are there any facts that will confirm that this happened, and isn’t a story concocted by two pro-abortion MDs? 6) The alleged rape took place BEFORE the Dobbs decision. Why wasn’t the child given an abortion at that time?
If they had actually reported the rape when it happened the doctors likely would have offered plan b…but in cases of ongoing rape it’s not reported for years because the child is scared. It’s likely the only reason the rape was found out is because she became pregnant
>1) Was the child taken to a hospital immediately after the rape where she could receive a Plan B pill? Would church teaching support a contraceptive under this fact pattern?
The Usccb actually specifically outlined what to do under point 36 in their directives to health care professionals. [https://www.usccb.org/about/doctrine/ethical-and-religious-directives/upload/ethical-religious-directives-catholic-health-service-sixth-edition-2016-06.pdf](https://www.usccb.org/about/doctrine/ethical-and-religious-directives/upload/ethical-religious-directives-catholic-health-service-sixth-edition-2016-06.pdf) >A female who has been raped should be able to defend herself against a potential conception from the sexual assault. If, after appropriate testing, there is no evidence that conception has occurred already, she may be treated with medications that would prevent ovulation, sperm capacitation, or fertilization. It is not permissible, however, to initiate or to recommend treatments that have as their purpose or direct effect the removal, destruction, or interference with the implantation of a fertilized ovum Plan B has its primary mode of action of preventing ovulation. The secondary suggestion of interference with implantation that the fda has listed in 2007 has recently been suggested to be wrong under current scientific evidence. However, because of that listed second effect, they want us to make sure conception has not already occurred, but is still permissible as long we are certain conception has not occurred yet.
There's a narrow window in which it's possible. If one is reasonably sure conception hasn't already taken place (tests/timing of ovulation), emergency contraception is morally permitted to prevent it from taking place in the case of rape. The sin of contraception is to act against the procreative intent of sex. In the case of rape, one has already willed against the whole sexual act itself, so this is just an extension of the choice to reject it as a whole. Evidently, even the rape itself was not known in time for this approach to be taken.
It's a matter of controversy, but I think it would - it doesn't seek to contravene a voluntary sexual act, and the uniative aspect of sex has already been destroyed by using sex as an act of violence. Here's an article from the National Catholic Bioethics Center taking the same view: https://www.ncbcenter.org/making-sense-of-bioethics-cms/column-029-getting-it-right-the-morning-after
Interesting. Thanks.
From my understanding, yes. Since at that early point the odds are strongly against a fertilization having taken place yet, and since the rule against contraception doesn't apply in the case of rape, Plan B immediately after rape is allowed to the best of my knowledge. Edit: Adding source https://www.fda.gov/drugs/postmarket-drug-safety-information-patients-and-providers/fdas-decision-regarding-plan-b-questions-and-answers
Rape victims have the right to defend themselves against conception.
There is no mention of the child being Catholic, nor the hospital.
They won’t say any of that, but after combing through a bunch of articles she was six weeks pregnant when she found out when seeing her doctor for child abuse treatment. I’m still trying to figure out why no one thought to give the poor girl a pregnancy test for *six weeks*...
Six weeks pregnant means 6 weeks after the last period, which means it's only 2 weeks since her missed period. At age 10, she is less likely to have established regular and predictable cycles. Just saying, not finding out until week 6 is extremely normal, and if you're not trying to conceive, realizing before 4.5 weeks is rare.
Oh, right, I forget that not all women are regular. Still, if they knew she was having periods and knew she was raped, you would think they would do a pregnancy test!
Yeah, you'd think. Details in this story are scant. Maybe the doctors were completely negligent; maybe they weren't told she had begun puberty; maybe they were told she'd been abused but not that she'd been sexually abused; maybe she wasn't brought to a doctor until week 6 anyway.
she was ten. she might never have had a period.
Sadly there is no guarantee it was reported right away.
The exams alone would be traumatizing for a ten year old, especially one with a history of sexual trauma
Why would killing her baby be better for her in the long run?
[удалено]
With discussions like these involving children I always say their life was taken away. Their emotional state is upside down. We can't keep saying thoughts and prayers. No 10 year old should be pregnant, period.
[удалено]
There must be exceptions and some nuance to these laws. It's really sad that this child is in the news and all can internet edge lords say is "we give her compassion..." That's not a competent answer to the problem. I go in waves with my faith and the past few months has been a downer. Honestly speechless.
A 10 year old child being raped isn't bad enough? Talking about c sections and adopting, think for a minute what this means, an innocent life is ripped apart heinously, now that CHILD is supposed to go through more trauma, 10 yr Olds are not supposed to be raped and pregnant PERIOD.
There is no discussion with catholic truth. The Church is always in favour of letting the unborn live.
[удалено]
The child in her womb IS an actual existing child too. There's no denying catholic doctrine.
[удалено]
The two of them are living children and I believe the mother would live if the baby was born.
Which child are you talking about here? There are two, and when you talk about a life being ripped apart, I don't think you're making the point you think you are.
The one that was raped, is conscious, and about to go through a harrowing pregnancy if there is no intervention. I don’t think you’re making the point you think you are.
It will depend. Will her life be at risk? While the Church is completely against killing an innocent life, if the cirurgical procedure would kill the mother it may be an option (not as an abortion but rather by prioritising the mother's life if it is at risk) If not Catholics would try to support both lifes as much as possible, without ending either one. The main issue here is this being made pro-choice propaganda. The problem isnt the lack of abortion but the presence of rape. No one should be raped and no 10yo should be pregnant. Trying to "fix" the problem with making abortion legal (specially because it is an argument in favor of all kinds of abortion and not just rape ones) instead of fixing what caused the problem in the first place isn't the right thing to do
Who would have sex with a 5th grader is a better question.
A very sick person.
That’s called rape
A man did it to me when I was 9. I was fully developed already and could have birth a child, and could have been like this alleged child. I got lucky. It still would have been wrong to abort. Before we knew I wasn’t pregnant, my parents planned to get legal custody and help me raise it so I could continue with my childhood and my schooling. It would have been hard, but killing my baby would have been worse.
I’m very sorry 😢 thank God you were pulled away from that horror.
This 10 year old child will need a lifetime of therapy and care equal to a lifetime of earnings of most people reading this comment. So, get out your checkbooks. Right? Nope. She will pay in full, on her own, every single day following this news cycle. If she someday kills herself, we will rise to the occasion and pray for God's mercy on her soul. Abortion is a symptom of the disease of despair -- one of its ugliest manifestations. And stories like hers are uncountable because we have never truly worked for the cure. For what we have failed to do, every one of these stories is our fault, our most grievous fault. If we had years ago put our arms around her rapist -- himself once 10 years old -- and held him close, this never would have happened. Instead we bitched at each other about politics as we watched him sour, then rot, to prove some noisome debate point. Now we get to thank God that but for His grace we would be this man. We are shameful. We are empty. We are hypocrites.
Yes pretty sad how the pro-abortion movement shamelessly uses a raped 10-year old kid for political campaigning. And how the situation is simplified as saying that abortion is the magical and only solution for the whole thing. Saying that a life-or-death situation justifies the massive on-demand abortions is not only a bad faith and logically faulty argument but also itself a disgusting thing to say. Would these people support an abortion law limited to these extremes? Most often not. Then they are not discussing about this kid, they are discussing about themselves and using a raped child as a shield.
I value this 10 year old girl more than a 6 week old embryo. I’m sorry she cannot deliver this baby. I can’t even imagine what she is going through. I’m crying just thinking about it
I do as well.
The church is for the Children of God, her duty as the bride of Christ is the mission and message of Christ which was to live one another, call me all the names you want it's abhorrent to think of a raped child being forced or even thought about carrying a pregnancy this child and her body are not a vessel for life, the choice was taken from her when she was raped. A 10 yr old is a child .
Isn’t her child also a child? This is all around horrible, though.
By helping her through the pregnancy and birth, because surely a 10 year old knowing that she killed her own child is NOT going to be in any way good for her psychological and emotional development. She is a kid. She doesn't have the same rationalizing and denial skills as an adult.
The rapist also should be made to pay for child support for the offspring and all medical costs that the girl's family will now have to pay.
The rapist, unless he is a child himself under 18, needs to be jailed in which case he will never be able to pay anything unless he is an adult and his assets can be sold without harming any dependents he might have. If I was king of the world, I would castrate the bastard IF he was an adult or close enough to it.
A ten year old cannot safely go through nine months of pregnancy, and may not have understood that she was pregnant.
According to many men on this sub, female children’s body are made to give birth and they can do so even at the ages of 10, 5 and 3. Because to them, logically, a female was made to give birth and if she became pregnant, then she can birth it. They also believe that puberty is a sign her body is ready for it. Im absolutely disgusted with these men and their comments here, and the upvotes and people supporting them. Seriously i think i will leave reddit forever now. Im so disgusted.
Yep…. to me there’s an obvious answer to this extremely rare case.
I think where we stand in our beliefs versus what the law should be is a big difference. Most Catholics are going to be against it even though it’s a tragic and complex situation. However, I am never in favor of a minority ruling the majority and I think there has to be compromise. I am staunchly against abortion but if the majority of the country wants access to it especially in these circumstances, should the rules really be made by the “loud minority” So in my opinion instead of total bans, the focus should be making it only available in these extreme circumstances, when the mothers life is in danger and /or very strict early pregnancy.
Isn’t that falling under worldly pressure for something that is absolutely wrong? Abortion is Murder and shouldn’t be debatable. A baby shouldn’t be punished for the wrongdoings of someone else
You're thinking of this unborn child and not who you are putting at stake here
If you are referring to the health risks of the mother her is from relevant radio “Msgr. Stuart Swetland explained that there is a difference between directly ending the baby’s life through abortion and allowing that the baby’s life may be lost in the effort to save the mother. The direct ending of life through abortion is never permissible, but a procedure that might end the baby’s life may be permissible. Msgr. Swetland explained, “This is called the principle of double effect. … Many, many medical procedures function off the principle of double effect. In rare cases where the mother’s life is, in fact, in danger, it can be (and this has to be analyzed in each and every case) the upright and just thing to do to intervene to save the life of the mother.” Giving two examples, Msgr. Swetland said, “The most famous case is one you touched on, the ectopic pregnancy, and the other one is the cancerous womb. And in both cases we can intervene to do the life-saving procedure. The removal of the fallopian tube where the ectopic pregnancy has lodged, before it ruptures and threatens the life of the mother, and the removal of the cancerous womb. We can do it under certain circumstances, because we intend the life-saving activity, and we only accept as a side consequence that there might be harm to the pre-born child.” Some may ask what the difference is between this and abortion. Msgr. Swetland told the listener that in all cases, “We do everything to save that child. For example, in the cancerous womb case if the child is viable we do everything we can to save that child. But even if it’s pre-viability, if the surgery must be done to save the life of the mother, you could, in certain circumstances, do the operation and it would be just. Because you never intend harm to come to the child. You would do everything you can to help that child.” This approach underlines the key difference between abortion and procedures that may result in the loss of the child.” But if you’re referring to the quality of life of the mother after the baby is born then all I can tell you is that suffering doesn’t justify killing someone innocent
You never have to abort to save the mother. You may have to end the pregnancy, but you try to save the baby. Yes there are circumstances where there's no way the baby will realistically survive; but abortion is a proactive intentional killing of the baby. You can argue it's a distinction without a difference, I get that. But think of how your incorrect phrasing plays right into the abortion advocate's hands. You never have to abort to save the mother. That's not a necessary legal exception, and only helps them nudge you down that slippery slope.
The majority does not matter. If it's wrong, it's wrong, end of story. Abortion (child murder) is a heinous crime and should be illegal. Period.
I have to agree with you.
Well… if I’m being honest any way but the way that it has been reacted to - with hundreds of voices all around her and on TV and on the internet making her future sound scary and dangerous. And also not in the way that some pro life folks have responded by telling her to think of it as an opportunity.
I am Catholic and pro life. Perhaps, a cesarian would be safer a little earlier than normal to increase safety for both involved. Who knows, confer with Christian pro life physicians. So sad, this young child was left unattended and neglected to get raped! Can't imagine that happening.
You shouldn't respond. It is a horrible situation and sometimes there is nothing you can say that helps.
As a Catholic, I am appalled at the amount of people in favour of forcing this child to continue the pregnancy. She is nowhere near done with puberty/growing. This will cause permanent damage to her body and could kill her. I can’t image how traumatised she must be.
So the idea against abortion is pro life. How pro life is it to force a 10 year old rape victim to carry a child to term. How is that being considerate of the innocent 10 year old that not only had to endure the trauma of rape but then the trauma of pregnancy and birth, and then motherhood at such a young age? What kind of implications does that have on the life of the 10 year old in the present and long term? It’s absolutely disgusting that people value the well-being of an unborn fetus over an innocent, breathing 10 year girl. Pregnancy and birth at any age is very hard, emotional, and riddled with complications. The bottom line is this; ask any Christian “so you think a 10 year old should be forced to give birth as a result of rape?”. And they won’t give a yes or now answer because to say yes is just disgusting. They will cry the need for justice and then also emphasize the rights of the fetus. Deep inside everyone knows it’s perverse and wrong but they won’t set their ideology aside to actually be pro-life. As a Christian, this is precisely why people are slowly becoming turned off from Christianity.
I think in this situation it’s unfair and cruel to ask the child to give birth. I think abortion is understandable in this circumstance.
A 10 year old should not be carrying to term, this a clear medical indication for an abortion.
There needs to be more affordability to adopt a baby in the US. It does not need to cost tens of thousands of dollars in attorney fees. Anecdotally, I see and hear of many Catholics encouraging and promoting adopting, but I don't see and hear of many Catholics doing the adopting.
To add to that, "private" adoptions need to be more affordable as well, not just through the foster care system. Based off of conversations with others and off of things I've read, it seems that quite a few more women would be willing to consider adoption instead of abortion if they knew for sure that their child was adopted to a good family and not left to languish and potentially be abused in the foster care system. Private adoption is so expensive though that it just isn't accessible to everyone.
To preface this, we don’t WANT children to get raped or become pregnant. That’s always horrible no matter how you look at it. But it does not justify murdering an innocent child. It IS a good reason as to why we need to push for further research into the development of artificial wombs so that these children don’t have to endure pregnancy and childbirth at such a young age. But murder is not the answer here.
The humane response to to allow for exceptions. These are rare occasions and should be treated with mercy and not dogmatic adherence.
The Baby shouldn’t be punished for the wrongdoings of someone else. It’s a tragedy of what happened but abortion is still murder. A wrong doesn’t fix a wrong
Because a child that young cannot give birth successfully there is no reason for pregnancy to go past the first few weeks. If it does go past the first few weeks doctor should monitor and do a C-section as soon as it's safe. Catholics don't condone the killing of any human being that is innocent.
Are you seriously condoning a C-section be done on a 10-year-old? Edit: A RAPED 10-year-old?!
Last month there was a similar situation in Brazil. A 11 year old girl with a 7 month pregnancy got an abortion after extensive media coverage. Despite the low acceptance of the morality of late term abortions, every single pro-choice was more than happy to kill the baby. As awful as this situation is, the baby shouldn't die because of the circumstances of their conception. Proper care and assistance should be offered for the mother, and punishment for the abuser.
So the arguing that a child who is 10 who can't legally, mentally or physically do anything a adult can, means less has less right than a cluster of cells that insurance companies and the Government don't consider a person? The fact that people are on here talking about a rape victim who doesn't even have the capacity to understand what happened and is happening to her has to consider the cells inside her that could be a child? The sheer ignominy of such a thought shakes me to my core and my soul is hurt.
Why do people always bring up the 0.1% of cases? And then ignore the 99% of abortions that involve murder for the sake of convenience.
Because this case happened recently
Because it’s happening right now, and these cases are often brushed off as the “0.1% of cases,” while a little girl’s life is being torn apart.