Judge orders abortion for disabled woman (Florida)

World Net Daily ^ | 5-23-03 | WND

[najida]

Nope,
That isn't what I am implying....

I work on the 'other side' of the fence...and I live for the day when I see folks fighting to make life better for the most helpless presently living, or heck...

When I see people actually visiting their own families in these institutions I will feel like we are on the right track.
But right now, I don't see that.

Read back all my posts....
These places are damn near empty of family or outsiders. People are clueless as to the needs or the problems. And I can't see a dividing line of race, money, religion.....

Something to do with being raised right is all I can see.

I helped evacuate a home with 200 bed-bound many years ago. We only had 8 family come to take their 'loved' ones out of harms way. We were expected to do the rest. Three died in transit.

That is the world I see these babes born into. So I am saying, lets fix it on this end. How, I haven't a clue, but I am at least rattling the chains.

[MHGinTN]

God bless you, Najida, that's all we can do while we take responsibility for our own in our lives. Perhaps example can be a force for change, if the right media could focus upon it.

[nickcarraway]

You are right, the judge's decision is pretty shameful. He doesn't care how many times she is raped, as long as she doesn't end up in his court again. He might as well send her to a veternarian, since she is no more than a cat to be spayed to him.

He should be considered an accomplice if she is ever raped again.

[Dec31,1999]

Rothenberg also ordered a DNA sample from the unborn baby be preserved so that police can identify the rapist, according to the paper.

This judge is really sick. Save a DNA Sample, but kill the human being.

[Dec31,1999]

I always get the feeling that people are much more concerned with a life in the womb, but once born, some people are more likely to look at that same life as a "welfare baby". Alot of these kids are simply not being adopted or even cared for properly.

Well, I'm not being cared for properly, either. Please come shoot me in the head to prevent me from living in misery.

[ChemistCat]

We are saving an awful lot of babies that nearly always died before technology caught up with them. Some of them grow up just fine, but some of them have such horrible, huge problems from prematurity and birth defects that they are too great a burden on normal families. When we draw that line on abortion law, we have to decide if we're willing to support a large population of people who cannot ever be productive. I have decided where I draw that line, but I cannot fault anyone who draws it differently at this point. The ethics are not so simple. One seizure, not an uncommon thing when changing meds, could make this woman into a total vegetable, greatly exacerbating the total misery in the picture. I've been reading up a little on treating epilepsy, and shunts, and I do now believe that this woman's health is really in increasing danger with every passing week. A C-section now and an attempt to save the baby seems the best plan to me, but I'm not there and I have only the facts in this article. I've never read a news article yet that wasn't slanted and incomplete.

And this judge is NOT evil. The decision he had to make was forced on him (and all of us) by someone who didn't care if he got a sick, retarded woman pregnant. It was a rock and a hard place, and he used HIS reason and the law of the land to decide. That's all any of us can do.

[Quick1]

You'd rather kill the already existing human being: the mother?

It's not a black and white world out there all the time.

[Dec31,1999]

She's not going to die by delivering the baby. The pro convenience people always say things like this. At least, I really doubt it. Nonetheless, in this case, the baby's life is probably more ethically valid than the mother's, since she will be able to speak and write, having had a "normal" father.

[Dec31,1999]

In other words, if you're going to decide who lives and who dies, according to Liberal ethicists, it should be the one who is more able to live a normal life, which would be the child , in this particular case.

In general, I think letting nature take its course is always preferrable to intervention, because 9 times out of ten, the mother and child both survive and in cases of retarted mothers, the child turns out normal.

[Quick1]

She's not going to die by delivering the baby. She COULD die, according to the article. A Miami judge has ruled a mentally disabled rape victim should have an abortion because the pregnancy could be life-threatening, according to local press reports. Not to mention the fact that the mother would have unbearable suffering even if she did live. It's not an abortion of "convenience" in this case.

[ChemistCat]

My research on severe epilepsy and fluid on the brain convinced me this morning that death is a possibility in this case if they try to save the baby--and what may be worse, greatly increased mental disability to the mother is also a very great possibility. It's really a wonder she made it this far, if the article here is accurate about her diagnoses, and I question the judgement of the people who brought her to court.

[RepubMommy]

God, why couldn't she deliver and the baby be placed for adoption?

[dsc]

"You'd rather kill the already existing human being: the mother?"

If the baby doesn't exist, she's not pregnant.

[happygrl]

You are truly a blessing to your mother. I hope she has had a gratifying life despite the circumstances of your conception.

Oh that the grandmother of this child could see it as a blessing.

[scriblett]

Exactly, and if they take the poor woman off her meds. she could die, probably quite horribly (seisures and vomiting etc.) This is most definitely a case where the mother's life is in danger and comes first. No question in my my mind that this pregnancy should be terminated, and quickly.

How can you be so cruel, If it were my daughter, I would be looking after her interests. I'm sure life's pretty hard for her and the mother who looks after her, and if the baby is born deformed and mentally disabled, who will be responsible for raising it, who will pay for the health care - all you guys?

[Concentrate]

She COULD die, according to the article.

It's 2003 and we're in the US. Women don't die in childbirth except for perhaps malpractice. The article is BS.

[Concentrate]

You'd rather kill the already existing human being: the mother?

There are 2 existing human beings involved. Not just one.

[Concentrate]

who will pay for the health care - all you guys?

Yes, and all the female taxpayers as well.

[Quick1]

It's 2003 and we're in the US. Women don't die in childbirth except for perhaps malpractice. The article is BS. Are you pulling this out of your ass? Obviously you don't realize all the factors involved. This isn't a "normal" childbirthing we're talking about. Also, women in the US die at a rate of 8.3 per 100,000 live births (look it up). It's rare, but it happens. Next time, please know what you're talking about.

[Quick1]

I had meant "already existing" as "living on her own", but now that I think about it, I take it back. This mother needs more care than even your typical baby.