Posted on 05/01/2005 7:21:19 AM PDT by madprof98
Calm down. Terri Schiavo is still dead. You can take comfort in that. (Or whiskey and whatever it is you do.)
Parent? What parent? The girl in this case has no parents who are in the picture. She is pregnant as a result of the negligence of DCF, and the same DCF is now trying to force her to continue the pregnancy against her wishes. As for the judge who claims she "lacks the maturity to make a decision", that's a preposterous legal argument. It is perfectly legal for her to have an abortion or to carry the pregnancy to term; would he also claim, if she was choosing the continue the pregnancy against DCF wishes, that she lacked the maturity to make THAT decision?
While a parent should have the legal right to block an abortion, unless competent medical authorities find that carrying the pregnancy to term would likely cause permanent physical harm or death (which may or not be the case with this 13 year old, but is certainly a real danger with younger pregnant girls), the state has no business making this decision one way or the other.
If I was a parent of a 13 year old girl, who'd been wrongly taken away from me (as is too often the case with these child "protection" agencies who are quick to yank kids from their parents based on anonymous allegations, or from parents who are homeschooling, or from parents who keep their guns loaded and readily accessible) I'd be livid if the state forced my daughter to continue a pregnancy -- she certainly wouldn't have continued it if whe was under my control. I'd sue the daylights out of everyone involved.
There was a thread a few months back about a 9 year old who was pregnant by an uncle. A handful of posters expressed a little concern for her (while still refusing to endorse an abortion), but the vast majority chanted the party line "So what if it'll "inconvenience" the girl? It's not the baby's fault!". Never mind that a 9 year old who's forced to carry a pregnancy to term is quite likely to end up genuinely wishing she'd never been born.
actually it makes a bit of sense. If a 13 year old can not give legal consent for becoming pregnant then she legally can not give legal consent to stop the pregnancy.
If you allow her to get an abortion by her "decision" then the age of consent is meaningless and it is open season on children.
The real serious issue here is whether this CHILD is making the decision or the aclu lawyer is "recovering memory" the decision for her.
The article does not mention who is the father. Was he over 18? Is so this is a criminal act.
Clearly you missed some of my other posts. I do not agree with those whose pro-lfe views stop at the moment of birth. This poor girl needs our prayers. And I think the best possible outcome for her is adoption. But I'm not convinced she will do that.
Is there any evidence her life is in danger?
"ANY CARE WHATSOEVER ABOUT THE HEALTH AND WELLBEING OF THE CHILD MOTHER!!! "
Uh, this teenager declared to a court that she can take care of herself (Even though her actions prove otherwise). She's run away from a group home. She's put herself in danger, and now put herself in the position of wanting to kill her own preborn child.
Does it make sense to express more care for her well-being than she does for herself?
"Go ahead. Ruin this little girls life. Kill her maybe."
What the H-E-double-hockey sticks have we come to, when deciding to say "NO" to a 13-year-old is now "ruining" the child's life? Are you channelling all the world's juvenile angst?!? I daresay her life was already pretty messed up when she got preggers out on the streets at 13, and an abortion is the last thing she really needs, both for herself and her child.
The only person that risks geting killed in this is the unborn child involved.
"She made her choice!"
And all choices that children make in life are all valid?
Parents know that children don't always make the right decisions. But how to explain and teach that? Parents know that shielding children from the consequences of their own decisions is not always 'love', but stunting their development.
Maybe it would be one thing to CLEAN UP HER LIFE to have her carry the baby to term, realize how she is unprepared for the consequences of her decisions and start thinking things through.
Sounds like you would beat her on the stomach til the grandkid was as dead as Terri Schiavo. You and "mercy" make a great team.
She's THIRTEEN genius.
I don't see any difference between the ACLU trying to make the decision for her, or DCF trying to make the decision for her. Neither entity has any legal standing to make the decision, except that if doctors determined that continuing the pregnancy posed a serious threat to the girl's health, then DCF would be required to see to it that she got the abortion, just as they have a legal duty to make sure she receives any other necessary medical treatment.
Under Florida law, she has the right to choose an abortion even if her parents object. The notion that DCF has greater rights over a child that even custodial parents would have is bizarre.
I gather from this and other articles about this case, that they don't know who the father is. Maybe the girl doesn't even know -- she could have been raped by a stranger and/or by multiple men -- a lot can happen to a 13 year old girl in a full month in which she's on the run and nobody is even looking for her -- pimps don't take long to find and exploit a girl in that situation.
You have a wild imagination. She'd have a medical abortion at the best clinic I could find, within 24 hours of my discovering she was pregnant.
Bet you wouldn't have any trouble finding a great clinic either!
I wouldn't, because I live in a state where good abortion clinics are plentiful.
Blue Staters are so cute.
Under FL parental consent law there has to be a full hearing before a court. She can not have a lawyer consent for her.
I think this is more a procedural issue rather than a will she or won't she. The judge has to find that she is making the decision freely and not being cooerced. Is the ACLU cooercing an abortion (You REALLLY REALLY want an abortion? yes?)
Since she is the ward of the state, the DCF IS her mother/father. There is no mother or father. I think the statory rape issue does play into this.
I am sure this will not be the last step on this. I am sure there will be appeals, however will the appeals courts follow the same "judge has final discretion of the facts" that was done under the schiavo case?
FL voters pass a parental notification amendment with judicial review provisions.
Legally speaking there is a difference between the third party ACLU and the legal guardian DCF.
footnote: one of the reasons the ACLU interceded on Rush limbaugh's medical privacy case was over protecting abortion rights. I wonder how that loss will be tied into this case.
But you would usurp gov's parental rights? Agree with him or not, it is his legal right as long as abortion is legal.
Pat Robertson helped start such an organization. Try here:
As we all know now, starving Terri Schiavo to death was legal too. Denying her mom the chance to put ice chips on her dying daughter's lips was legal. It was all LEGAL. And the whole point of the death-culture-lovers is to make sure that there could never, ever be a category any higher than LEGAL in the minds of the people of this country. That is why (despite their "I'm a Christian myself" rhetoric) that these same people do everything in their power to demean and destroy those who believe in a Higher Power than Me/Myself/I.
You're welcome! Jay Sekulow is a fantastic lawyer. He tried to help Terri Schiavo.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.