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 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 521-524 next last
To: wagglebee; Hank Kerchief
Well, if you look at the link on Hanks FR homepage, it links to his “Independent Individualist” page where he proudly has an Alex Jones video:

Ah ha, I was right. There's the Paul connection. Something in the back of my mind kept hinting at it. Probably from the 2008 election debates here...

201 posted on 04/06/2010 8:47:37 AM PDT by bcsco (Obama: Hokus Pokus POTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief

You are an anarchist. It’s here for all to see, in your own words.

Your denying it fools no one but yourself.


202 posted on 04/06/2010 8:48:47 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: metmom
If you are going to use the Bible for your source of ethics then do it honestly.

The life of the flesh is in the blood and there is no blood flowing at conception and God was fully aware of that when He had it written.

203 posted on 04/06/2010 8:49:03 AM PDT by Eagle Eye (The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Well, if you look at the link on Hanks FR homepage, it links to his “Independent Individualist” page where he proudly has an Alex Jones video:
http://usabig.com/atnmst/jrnl_ii.php?art=49

The video is not too bad. I don’t care at all for Alex Jones, but one of the Christian authors I publish sent me the link asking me to post it. So I did.

By the way, at least four of the authors I publish every week are Christians.

http://usabig.com/iindv/jrnl.php

Hank


204 posted on 04/06/2010 8:51:54 AM PDT by Hank Kerchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]

To: MrB; Hank Kerchief; wagglebee; P-Marlowe; xzins; bcsco; Coleus; narses; BykrBayb; floriduh voter; ..
I bet you have “judge not” memorized (out of context) as well.

For claiming to be atheist, Hank sure knows Scripture well enough to try to bludgeon believers into submission to his viewpoint with it.

That's pretty typical of atheists. They think that just cause they whip out Scripture and (mis)quote a few Bible verses at believers, that all of a sudden believers are going to go into a tailspin thinking that God disapproves of what the atheist thinks is *unChristian* behavior, and back off or roll over and expose their jugular.

Atheists think of and use Scripture like some kind of mind control device over Christians. We're not as ignorant of Scripture and their atheistic tactics as they think we are.

It's funny... So many atheists accuse Christians of hypocrisy, and yet turn around and appeal to the Bible and God that they reject in a bid to try to win a debate they're losing.

Talk about hypocritical. They need to argue their own position on its own merits if they think that atheist is so rational.

205 posted on 04/06/2010 8:57:25 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye
Using bold doesn't make something true or applicable.

No, but it highlights what I'm going to address in my response...

You are picking and choosing what parts of the Bible you want to uphold and act on, it is as simple as that.

Just following your lead...

Again, Adam wasn't a living soul until he breathed and the Bible says that the life of the flesh is in the blood, and blood isn't flowing in the first month or so.

Adam's birth was completely different from conception as we know it. "Gen 2:7 then the LORD God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature." See what I mean by following your lead...? Not a proper example of what we're discussing; the gift of life given to a woman by God, and which encompasses an entirely different process.

You want to kill fetuses, go ahead. It's you who will answer for it, not me.

206 posted on 04/06/2010 8:57:28 AM PDT by bcsco (Obama: Hokus Pokus POTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

I dread writing this, but I must respectfully disagree. I believe that every girl or woman should always be given the opportunity to terminate a very early stage pregnancy resulting from incest or rape.


207 posted on 04/06/2010 9:01:34 AM PDT by July4 (Remember the price paid for your freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: metmom

Humans lost the ability to govern themselves when they were given free will, and sin entered the World. As another poster put it, our form of government is based on Christian ideals and is the most decent, non-intrusive form yet developed (or up to now, anyway). Some form of government is necessary to counteract evil. And humans are by nature prone to evil. I know ol’ Hank will disagree as he doesn’t see himself as sinful, but there it is.


208 posted on 04/06/2010 9:01:40 AM PDT by bcsco (Obama: Hokus Pokus POTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: metmom

“You are an anarchist. It’s here for all to see, in your own words.

Your denying it fools no one but yourself.”

As I said before, I do not care who thinks that. Even if it were true, I don’t know why you’re getting panties in a wad over it. What do you care?

For anyone who would like to know the truth, I explain here:

http://usabig.com/atnmst/jrnl_ii.php?art=89

Hank


209 posted on 04/06/2010 9:01:42 AM PDT by Hank Kerchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief
For anyone who would like to know the truth, I explain here:

We already know the truth. We're not interested in your distortion of it. And the truth is, you're an atheist. Or some sort of deist. It has to be one or the other. You just won't admit it.

210 posted on 04/06/2010 9:04:57 AM PDT by bcsco (Obama: Hokus Pokus POTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies]

To: bcsco

Just curious. Why are you so interested in me. I’m not interested in you. Don’t you have anything else to do?

Hank


211 posted on 04/06/2010 9:07:49 AM PDT by Hank Kerchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief; bcsco

I’m not a theist.= I am an atheist.

It’s simply a matter of where the negative in the sentence is put.

If you believe that there is no God, by definition, you are an *a*theist.

http://www.wordinfo.info/words/index/info/view_unit/2838

*a* meaning *non* in the Greek.

a-, an- +
(Greek: a prefix meaning: no, absence of, without, lack of, not)

These prefixes are normally used with elements of Greek origin, a- is used before consonants and an- is used before vowels.

It affects the meanings of hundreds of words.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/atheist

Main Entry: athe·ist

Function: noun
Date: 1551

: one who believes that there is no deity


212 posted on 04/06/2010 9:08:25 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: July4

Why? By what civilized standard should a child be held responsible for the crimes of his or her father?


213 posted on 04/06/2010 9:11:12 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 207 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

He’s the second person I’ve seen on FR in as many days who is promoting Alex Jones. Another evo/atheist was carrying on about how much Alex Jones was correct on.


214 posted on 04/06/2010 9:13:52 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief
Just curious. Why are you so interested in me. I’m not interested in you. Don’t you have anything else to do?

Again you're mistaken. I'm not interested in you, just in correcting your misconceptions. And here you present another one...

As for other things to do, I do them while online, and I've also been tending a thread on how different usernames came to be. Rather entertaining...

215 posted on 04/06/2010 9:17:03 AM PDT by bcsco (Obama: Hokus Pokus POTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief
My grounds, by the way, are ethical, but my ethics are absolute, not the arbitrary ethics of religion.

Absolute according to WHOSE standards? Yours? That sounds pretty arbitrary to me.

What makes your ethics any more absolute than anyone else's?

216 posted on 04/06/2010 9:17:59 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]

To: metmom

Which troll is that?


217 posted on 04/06/2010 9:18:37 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

To: metmom; Hank Kerchief

Yep, as I pointed out above, Hank doesn’t understand what he’s saying. He says he’s no atheist. But that then means he’s a deist since atheist is the opposite of deist. Yet he says he doesn’t believe in God. I don’t think ol’ Hank really understands what his beliefs are...

Oh, and Hank, again this isn’t because I’m interested in you, but because I’m trying to clear up your inconsistencies. You talk in circles...


218 posted on 04/06/2010 9:21:37 AM PDT by bcsco (Obama: Hokus Pokus POTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 212 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief; bcsco

Getting a little warm in the kitchen?

You finally get pinned down about what you believe, and you start changing the subject.

It’s too late. You’ve been exposed and are no longer in a position to be able to deny what you believe without looking more like a total fool than you already are.

Not a pretty picture is it?


219 posted on 04/06/2010 9:21:40 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies]

To: metmom

Someone... hmmm... I’m trying to think who...

quoted Scripture to try to get Christ to sin...

can’t remember who that was...

:)

The answer to someone who tries to use Scripture to silence believers

is MORE SCRIPTURE.

The verses they quote are out of context,
and the context is the ENTIRE BIBLE.

Know your Bible, and the overall CONSISTENT theme (and there are no inconsistencies),
and you’ll not be baffled by an out of context quote.


220 posted on 04/06/2010 9:22:21 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 205 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 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