Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What About Abortion in Cases of Rape and Incest? Women and Sexual Assault
Life News ^ | 4/5/10 | Amy Sobie

Posted on 04/05/2010 3:13:26 PM PDT by wagglebee

LifeNews.com Note: Amy Sobie is the editor of The Post-Abortion Review, a quarterly publication of the Elliot Institute. The organization is a widely respected leader in research and analysis of medical, mental health and other complications resulting from abortions.

April is Sexual Assault Awareness Month. Many people, including those whose mission is to help women and girls who are victims of sexual assault and abuse, believe abortion is the best solution if a pregnancy occurs.

Yet our research shows that most women who become pregnant through sexual assault don't want abortion, and say abortion only compounds their trauma.

“How can you deny an abortion to a twelve-year-old girl who is the victim of incest?”

Typically, people on both sides of the abortion debate accept the premise that most women who become pregnant through sexual assault want abortions. From this “fact,” it naturally follows that the reason women want abortions in these cases is because it will help them to put the assault behind them, recover more quickly, and avoid the additional trauma of giving birth to a “rapist’s child.”

But in fact, the welfare of a mother and her child are never at odds, even in sexual assault cases. As the stories of many women confirm, both the mother and the child are helped by preserving life, not by perpetuating violence.

Sadly, however, the testimonies of women who have actually been pregnant through sexual assault are routinely left out of this public debate. Many people, including sexual assault victims who have never been pregnant, may be forming opinions based on their own prejudices and fears rather than the real life experiences of those people who have been in this difficult situation and reality.

For example, it is commonly assumed that rape victims who become pregnant would naturally want abortions. But in the only major study of pregnant rape victims ever done prior to this book, Dr. Sandra Mahkorn found that 75 to 85 percent did not have abortions. This figure is remarkably similar to the 73 percent birth rate found in our sample of 164 pregnant rape victims. This one finding alone should cause people to pause and reflect on the presumption that abortion is wanted or even best for sexual assault victims.1

Several reasons were given for not aborting. Many women who become pregnant through sexual assault do not believe in abortion, believing it would be a further act of violence perpetrated against their bodies and their children. Further, many believe that their children’s lives may have some intrinsic meaning or purpose which they do not yet understand. This child was brought into their lives by a horrible, repulsive act. But perhaps God, or fate, will use the child for some greater purpose. Good can come from evil.

The woman may also sense, at least at a subconscious level, that if she can get through the pregnancy she will have conquered the rape. By giving birth, she can reclaim some of her lost self-esteem. Giving birth, especially when conception was not desired, is a totally selfless act, a generous act, a display of courage, strength, and honor. It is proof that she is better than the rapist. While he was selfish, she can be generous. While he destroyed, she can nurture.

Adding to the Trauma

Many people assume that abortion will at least help a rape victim put the assault behind her and get on with her life. But evidence shows that abortion is not some magical surgery which turns back the clock to make a woman “un-pregnant.”

Instead, it is a real life event which is always very stressful and often traumatic. Once we accept that abortion is itself an event with deep ramifications for a woman’s life, then we must look carefully at the special circumstances of the pregnant sexual assault victim. Evidence indicates that abortion doesn't help and only causes further injury to an already bruised psyche?

But before we even get to this issue, we must ask: do most women who become pregnant as a result of sexual assault want to abort?

In our survey of women who became pregnant as a result of rape or incest, many women who underwent abortions indicated that they felt pressured or were strongly directed by family members or health care workers to have abortions. The abortion came about not because of the woman's desire to abort but as a response to the suggestions or demands of others. In many cases, resources such as health workers, counselors and others who are normally there to help women after sexual assault pushed for abortion.

Family pressure, withholding of support and resources that the woman needed to continue the pregnancy, manipulative an inadequate counseling and other problems all played a role into pushing women into abortions, even though abortion was often not what the woman really wanted.

Further, in almost every case involving incest, it was the girl's parents or the perpetrator who made the decision and arrangements for the abortion, not the girl herself. None of these women reported having any input into the decision. Each was simply expected to comply with the choice of others. In several cases, the abortion was carried out over the objections of the girl, who clearly told others that wanted to continue the pregnancy. In a few cases, victim was not even clearly aware that she was pregnant or that the abortion was being carried out.

"Medical Rape"

Second, although many people believe that abortion will help a woman resolve the trauma of rape more quickly, or at least keep her from being reminded of the rape throughout her pregnancy, many of the women in our survey who had abortions reported that abortion only added to and accentuated the traumatic feelings associated with sexual assault.

This is easy to understand when one considers that many women have described their abortions as being similar to a rape (and even used the term "medical rape), it is easy to see that abortion is likely to add a second trauma to the earlier trauma of sexual assault. Abortion involves an often painful intrusion into a woman’s sexual organs by a masked stranger who is invading her body. Once she is on the operating table, she loses control over her body. Even if she protests and asks the abortionist to stop, chances are she will be either ignored or told that it's too late to stop the abortion.

For many women this experiential association between abortion and sexual assault is very strong. It is especially strong for women who have a prior history of sexual assault, whether or not the aborted child was conceived during an act of assault. This is just one reason why women with a history of sexual assault are likely to experience greater distress during and after an abortion than are other women.

Research also shows that women who abort and women who are raped often describe similar feelings of depression, guilt, lowered self-esteem, violation and resentment of men. Rather than easing the psychological burdens experienced by those who have been raped, abortion added to them. Jackie wrote:

I soon discovered that the aftermath of my abortion continued a long time after the memory of my rape had faded. I felt empty and horrible. Nobody told me about the pain I would feel deep within causing nightmares and deep depressions. They had all told me that after the abortion I could continue my life as if nothing had happened.2

Those encouraging, pushing or insisting on abortion often do so because they are uncomfortable dealing with sexual assault victims, or perhaps because they harbor some prejudice against victims whom they feel “let it happen.” Wiping out the pregnancy is a way of hiding the problem. It is a “quick and easy” way to avoid dealing with the woman’s true emotional, social and financial needs. As Kathleen wrote:

I, having lived through rape, and also having raised a child “conceived in rape,” feel personally assaulted and insulted every time I hear that abortion should be legal because of rape and incest. I feel that we're being used by pro-abortionists to further the abortion issue, even though we've not been asked to tell our side of the story.

Trapping the Incest Victim

The case against abortion for incest pregnancies is even stronger. Studies show that incest victims rarely ever voluntarily agree to abortion. Instead of viewing the pregnancy as unwanted, the incest victim is more likely to see the pregnancy as a way out of the incestuous relationship because the birth of her child will expose the sexual activity. She is also likely to see in her pregnancy the hope of bearing a child with whom she can establish a truly loving relationship, one far different than the exploitive relationship in which she has been trapped.

But while the girl may see her pregnancy as a possible way of release from her situation, it poses a threat to her abuser. It is also poses a threat to the pathological secrecy which may envelop other members of the family who are afraid to acknowledge the abuse. Because of this dual threat, the victim may be coerced or forced into an unwanted abortion by both the abuser and other family members.

For example, Edith, a 12-year-old victim of incest impregnated by her stepfather, writes twenty-five years after the abortion of her child:

Throughout the years I have been depressed, suicidal, furious, outraged, lonely, and have felt a sense of loss . . . The abortion which was to “be in my best interest” just has not been. As far as I can tell, it only ‘saved their reputations,’ ‘solved their problems,’ and ‘allowed their lives to go merrily on.’ . . . My daughter, how I miss her so. I miss her regardless of the reason for her conception."

Abortion businesses who routinely ignore this evidence and neglect to interview minors presented for abortion for signs of coercion or incest are actually contributing to the victimization of young girls. Not only are they robbing the victim of her child, they are concealing a crime, abetting a perpetrator, and handing the victim back to her abuser so that the exploitation can continue.

For example, the parents of three teenaged Baltimore girls pleaded guilty to three counts of first-degree rape and child sexual abuse. The father had repeatedly raped the three girls over a period of at least nine years, and the rapes were covered up by at least ten abortions. At least five of the abortions were performed by the same abortionist at the same clinic.3

Sadly, there is strong evidence that failing to ask questions about the pregnancy and to report cases of sexual abuse are widespread at abortion clinics. Undercover investigations by pro-life groups have found numerous cases in which clinics agreed to cover up cases of statutory rape or ongoing abuse of minor girls by older men and simply perform an abortion instead.

In 2002 a judge found a Planned Parenthood affiliate in Arizona negligent for failing to report a case in which a 13-year-old girl was impregnated and taken for an abortion by her 23-year-old foster brother. The abortion business did not notify authorities until the girl returned six months later for a second abortion. A lawsuit alleged that the girl was subjected to repeated abuse and a second abortion because Planned Parenthood failed to notify authorities when she had her first abortion. The girl's foster brother was later imprisoned for abusing her.4

Finally, we must recognize that children conceived through sexual assault also deserve to have their voices heard. Rebecca Wasser-Kiessling, who was conceived in a rape, is rightfully proud of her mother’s courage and generosity and wisely reminds us of a fundamental truth that transcends biological paternity: “I believe that God rewarded my birth mother for the suffering she endured, and that I am a gift to her. The serial rapist is not my creator; God is.”

Similarly, Julie Makimaa, who works diligently against the perception that abortion is acceptable or even necessary in cases of sexual assault, proclaims, “It doesn't matter how I began. What matters is who I will become.”

That’s a slogan we can all live with.


Citations

1. Mahkorn, "Pregnancy and Sexual Assault," The Psychological Aspects of Abortion, eds. Mall & Watts, (Washington, D.C., University Publications of America, 1979) 55-69.

2. David C. Reardon, Aborted Women, Silent No More (Chicago, IL: Loyola University Press, 1987), 206.

3. Jean Marbella, "Satisfactory explanations of sex crime proved elusive," Baltimore Sun, Oct. 31, 1990; M. Dion Thompson, "GBMC, doctor suspected nothing amiss," Baltimore Sun, Oct. 31. 1990; "Family Horror Comes to Light in Story of Girls Raped by Father," Baltimore Sun, November 4, 1990; Raymond L. Sanchez, "Mother Sentenced in Rape Case," Baltimore Sun, Dec. 6, 1990.

4. "Planned Parenthood Found Negligent in Reporting Molested Teen's Abortion," Pro-Life Infonet, attributed to Associated Press; Dec. 26, 2002.



TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abortion; moralabsolutes; prolife; rape
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 521-524 next last
To: bcsco; Hank Kerchief
What the hell are you talking about?

He's pulling a liberal stunt. He calls people liars when it's he himself that is lying.

He's trying to take advantage of those people that didn't learn Latin.

fetus (Latin) = infant,young,progeny (English)

101 posted on 04/05/2010 10:57:50 PM PDT by Knitebane (Happily Microsoft free since 1999.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief
So long as those are your only arguments the pro-abortionists will win.

So this is a debate at the Oxford Union now?

You're ridiculous.

102 posted on 04/05/2010 11:02:44 PM PDT by Trailerpark Badass (One good thing about music, when it hits you feel no pain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief; metmom; wagglebee; P-Marlowe; betty boop; Alamo-Girl
A fetus is not born and is not regarded as a human being either legally or Biblically. Notice that all ages are from the date of birth, not conception.

Biblically, that is not so.

The story of Jesus' birth is also a story of John Batist's birth. John leapt in his mother's womb when Mary visited Elizabeth. John is clearly shown reacting as a sentient, spiritual being. You do greatly err.

Luke 1: 41 When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. 42 In a loud voice she exclaimed: "Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear! 43 But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? 44 As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy. 45 Blessed is she who has believed that what the Lord has said to her will be accomplished!"

103 posted on 04/06/2010 1:03:48 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: KarenMarie

Babies feel pain in the womb. So a baby who is aborted experiences pain, this is no doubt about this. So abortion is never good for a baby; and since death is inevitable for everyone at some point, abortion is always for the convenience of the mother or father.

I may tell my own story later. I know from very bitter personal experience that choosing abortion imparts pain that doesn’t go away, even after decades.


104 posted on 04/06/2010 4:10:38 AM PDT by little jeremiah (Asato Ma Sad Gamaya Tamaso Ma Jyotir Gamaya)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: KarenMarie
don’t know that I could hold a suffering,dying baby, thinking I could have prevented that. It is a horrible choice to have to make

This choice is not horrible and you are free to make it. The mother is at liberty, in fact, it is her obligation, to give the baby, dying and suffering or otherwise, all the care that she can afford and the medical science offers. She is not at liberty to kill him, again, regardless of any anguish she might be experiencing.

105 posted on 04/06/2010 4:57:07 AM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief; bcsco; metmom; Coleus; narses; BykrBayb; floriduh voter; Lesforlife; annalex; ...
I just disagree with you, and think what you want will ultimately produce the opposite of what you seek. Government is not the solution, as Ronald Regan [sic] said, “government is the problem.”

There are a few Reagan quotes that libertarian anarchists love to misquote and that is one of them.

President Reagan was saying that government intervention would create more problems in the 1982 recession, he WAS NOT saying that the government was always the problem.

What you are trying to attribute to President Reagan is the idea that he would have opposed laws outlawing abortion and nothing could be further from the truth.

106 posted on 04/06/2010 5:01:30 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Excellent post!


107 posted on 04/06/2010 5:05:34 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: xzins; metmom; wagglebee; P-Marlowe; betty boop; Alamo-Girl
ME: "A fetus is not born and is not regarded as a human being either legally or Biblically. Notice that all ages are from the date of birth, not conception."

"Biblically, that is not so."

"The story of Jesus' birth is also a story of John Batist's birth. John leapt in his mother's womb when Mary visited Elizabeth. John is clearly shown reacting as a sentient, spiritual being. You do greatly err."

Then quoted Luke 1:41

It does not say the babe is a human being. It is unborn, not a baby yet. Unborn babies move all the time. Just because something moves it does not make it a human being.

If the unborn are already human being, why isn't age marked from conception and not birth.

Gen.12:12 "And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised ..."

And every other reference to cirmcision's date is the same. Eight days, not eight days and nine months.

Since you like to quote Scripture:

In the Bible the penalty for murder is death, as well as for a great many other wrongs. The death penalty is prescribed for all the following:

Worshipping other gods [Exodus 22:24, Deut. 13:1-5, 20-22]
Idolatry [Deut.. 17:2-7]
Blaspheming [Lev. 24:10-16]
Violating Sabbath [Exodus 31:15, 35:2, Num. 15:32-36]
Dishonoring Parents [Exodus 21:15&17, Lev. 20:9, Deut. 21:18-20]
Murder [Exodus 21:12-14, Lev. 24:17, Num. 35:17, 30-33, Gen. 9:6]
Adultery & Fornication [Exodus 22:18, Lev. 20:17, Deut. 22:21-29]
Stealing [Josh 7:10-26]
False Witness [Deut. 19:15-21]
Kidnapping [Exodus 21:16]
Covetousness [Josh 7:10-26]

Causing a woman to loose an unborn child, however, did not bear the death penalty, because it was not considered murder, that is, it is not killing a human being. It is not even considered as sever as idolatry, or covetousness.

If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. (That is, a fine.) [Exodus 21:22]

Hank

108 posted on 04/06/2010 5:18:43 AM PDT by Hank Kerchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief; xzins; bcsco; metmom; Coleus; narses; BykrBayb; floriduh voter; Lesforlife; ...
It does not say the babe is a human being. It is unborn, not a baby yet. Unborn babies move all the time. Just because something moves it does not make it a human being.

Then what EXACTLY makes it a human being?

If a baby IS NOT a human being then why have you previously said that you are opposed to killing it? (Though you have no interest in actually ending abortion.)

Causing a woman to loose an unborn child, however, did not bear the death penalty, because it was not considered murder, that is, it is not killing a human being. It is not even considered as sever [sic] as idolatry, or covetousness.

Is this one of the new talking points that Zero has put out for pro-abortion trolls?

Show us from Scripture where it says that abortion IS NOT a serious offense. Show us where it distinguishes abortion from murder.

109 posted on 04/06/2010 5:29:22 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

“What you are trying to attribute to President Reagan is the idea that he would have opposed laws outlawing abortion and nothing could be further from the truth.”

I know exactly what the context of Ronald Reagan’s statement was. I’m not attributing anything to him. I was not quoting it as authority, it was rhetorical for a principle, that government involvement in anything is always a problem.

If you decide that government ought to have the power to decide medical issues, and what a woman must or must not do with regard to her unborn child, you’ve accepted that principle, and have no argument when the government decides a woman who already has one or two children must abort any additional children, and you have no argument against ObamaCare.

I do not want the government to have that power, ever.

Hank


110 posted on 04/06/2010 5:30:36 AM PDT by Hank Kerchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

One thing you MUST keep in mind.

The most vehement pro-aborts (ie, “reproductive rights”) are actually HAD-aborts. They KNOW the truth - they killed an innocent human baby.

Any reminder in law, or in societal morality, that reminds them that, indeed, their child was a little human being, THEIR CHILD, and that they “chose” to kill it,

is completely unacceptable to their conscience.

Asking for forgiveness from the Lord and repenting and attempting to spread the truth about what abortion really is would actually give them the peace they desire.

But they often choose to justify their “choice” - I HAD A RIGHT TO DO IT! IT WASN’T A BABY! (even though their conscience screams to the contrary)


111 posted on 04/06/2010 5:36:03 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a humanist and a Satanist is that the latter knows who he's working for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: dsc

That puts it better than I would have.


112 posted on 04/06/2010 5:36:19 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief

“If you decide that government ought to have the power to decide medical issues,...”

Abortion is NOT a medical issue. Medical ethics always forbade abortion. It was the STATE getting involved that took what was ALWAYS a crime and made it legal.


113 posted on 04/06/2010 5:37:57 AM PDT by narses ("lex orandi, lex credendi, lex vivendi")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: patriot08

I, for one, admire your candor.


114 posted on 04/06/2010 5:38:55 AM PDT by verity (Obama Lies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

“Make no mistake, abortion-on-demand is not a right guaranteed by the Constitution. No serious scholar, including one disposed to agree with the Court’s result, has argued that the framers of the Constitution intended to create such a right.”
Ronald Reagan


115 posted on 04/06/2010 5:39:27 AM PDT by narses ("lex orandi, lex credendi, lex vivendi")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief

“Abortion is advocated only by persons who have themselves been born.” Ronald Reagan


116 posted on 04/06/2010 5:40:00 AM PDT by narses ("lex orandi, lex credendi, lex vivendi")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief

Only half the patients who go into an abortion clinic come out alive.


117 posted on 04/06/2010 5:41:26 AM PDT by narses (Only half the patients who go into an abortion clinic come out alive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: narses

What the Divine has ruled on,
let us not pretend to rule against.


118 posted on 04/06/2010 5:42:19 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a humanist and a Satanist is that the latter knows who he's working for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye; DBeers
Some will call you pro abortion and a baby killer even though you could be 100% against abortion but because you fail to effectively impose your will on others then you will be a baby killer and pro abortion.

My God man, do you have two functioning brain cells to see that the issue is about murder, not some feely good twisted misunderstanding of *freedom*?

By your twisted reasoning, we might as well just make all forms of murder legal, because after all, why should anyone impose his will on anyone else who wants to kill someone? After all, that's government intervention, forcing someone to not do what they want to and the government doesn't have that right. They have their *freedom* after all. If they want to kill someone, who's business it that?

119 posted on 04/06/2010 5:44:56 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: metmom

Often when you ask someone WHEN does the “fetus” become a human deserving the protection of the state,

you’ll get a “I don’t know”. This was 0bama’s answer - “above my pay grade”.

Well, then - if we “don’t know”, or more accurately, don’t want to admit where the logic would take us,

should we err on the side of KILLING A HUMAN BEING?

If I was hunting with a buddy and didn’t know where he was and saw some movement in the brush ahead and “didn’t know” if it was a deer or my hunting buddy, should I just “err on the side of convenience” and shoot at the movement in case it’s a deer?


120 posted on 04/06/2010 5:45:15 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a humanist and a Satanist is that the latter knows who he's working for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 521-524 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson