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

Skip to comments.

Judge orders abortion for disabled woman (Florida)
World Net Daily ^ | 5-23-03 | WND

Posted on 05/23/2003 5:00:00 PM PDT by cgk

MATTERS OF LIFE AND DEATH

Judge orders abortion
for disabled woman

28-year-old also to undergo tubal ligation to bar future pregnancies


Posted: May 23, 2003
4:45 p.m. Eastern


© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com

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.

The woman, whose identity is not being revealed, is mentally retarded with the cognitive abilities of a 4-year-old, deaf, prone to having seizures and has a shunt in her brain to drain excess fluid.

Police believe the woman was raped, and likely more than once.

Medical experts say carrying the pregnancy to full-term would be dangerous for her and may result in the baby being deformed. The mother of the woman asked for the pregnancy to be terminated.

"My main concern now is my daughter, she told the South Florida Sun-Sentinel. "When I heard that heartbeat, you will never know what it did to me. But I can't be asked to choose between my grandchild or my daughter."

Doctors at Jackson Memorial Hospital scheduled an abortion for last week, reports the Sun-Sentinel, but chose not to perform it because the baby appeared to be developing normally and there was no medical reason to terminate the pregnancy.

Yesterday, the woman's newly appointed guardians asked the court to decide the fate of the 23-week-old unborn baby.

"My baby no more" the disabled woman reportedly told the judge at the hearing.

Lewis Fogle, the woman's court-appointed attorney, told Circuit Judge Arthur Rothenberg that after looking into the case and communicating with her as much as he could, he concluded she wanted an abortion.

In a brief order issued today, Rothenberg agreed to the abortion and also ordered the 28-year-old woman to undergo a tubal ligation to prevent future pregnancies, reports the Miami Herald.

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

The ruling may have an effect on the controversial case of a disabled 22-year-old Orlando woman who was also raped while under the care of Florida child-welfare authorities.

As WorldNetDaily reported, Gov. Jeb Bush intervened in the case, requesting a guardian be appointed to represent the interests of the unborn baby.

His involvement came after officials with the Department of Children & Families, or DCF, initially filed an emergency petition asking a circuit judge in Orlando to appoint separate guardians for the woman and the child, but later dropped the request, citing a 1989 Florida Supreme Court ruling in a landmark abortion-rights case.

Bush, who opposes abortion, overruled the agency and ordered lawyers to seek a guardian for the unborn baby.

"Given the facts of this case, it is entirely appropriate that an advocate be appointed to represent the unborn child's best interests in all decisions," Bush said in a statement. "While others may interpret this case in light of their own positions, we see it as the singular tragedy it is, and remain focused on serving the best interests of this particular victim and her unborn child."

The ACLU, along with the National Organization for Women and Center for Reproductive Rights, filed a court brief asking the court to deny the governor's request, claiming such a judgment would go against precedent that a "fetus" is not a person.

Previous article:

Governor seeks guardian for unborn baby


TOPICS: Breaking News; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Politics/Elections; US: Florida
KEYWORDS: abortion; abortionlist; democrats; disabled; fetus; florida; jebbush; nhs; prolife
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-195 next last
To: Lorianne
I'm with you on this one, Lorianne. Catch the rapist, de-nut him, then put him in prison for the rest of his life and on female hormones so he can better fit as the rape victim of the 'lads' behind bars. Serve the bastard right!
21 posted on 05/23/2003 5:35:07 PM PDT by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle
Medical experts say carrying the pregnancy to full-term would be dangerous for her and may result in the baby being deformed. The mother of the woman asked for the pregnancy to be terminated.

I question the term "expert", as that usually means a liberal phoney...but...assuming these claims are valid, why would you want to move forward with a handicapped child? What good would it do to risk the life of this incapable person just to bring another incapable person into the world? I'm not following your "hell" logic.

22 posted on 05/23/2003 5:38:50 PM PDT by YoungKentuckyConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: All
If the disabled pregnant woman can say to the judge "my baby no more" then how can he ORDER her tubes tied without her consent?

23 posted on 05/23/2003 5:39:01 PM PDT by Conservababe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: dogbyte12
Well said.
24 posted on 05/23/2003 5:39:35 PM PDT by YoungKentuckyConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: A-teamMom
Please note, from the article: Doctors at Jackson Memorial Hospital scheduled an abortion for last week, reports the Sun-Sentinel, but chose not to perform it because the baby appeared to be developing normally and there was no medical reason to terminate the pregnancy. What's that we always hear from the pro-killing crowd, 'It's a decision for doctors, not courts'?
25 posted on 05/23/2003 5:40:21 PM PDT by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: dogbyte12
You have no need to apologize for your "rant." I take no offense, and I welcome debate. Thank you for not calling me names; standard practice here lately at FR.

Her medications MAY cause deformities. Again, there are tests for these things. And the baby could be delivered by C-section in a matter of weeks. I've seen babies survive who were delivered that were younger and smaller than this. And - I am most certainly praying for this woman and her mother, and the pre-born baby. It's not a matter of smugness for me. It never has been. It's a matter of placing trust in God, and if medical assistance is needed to save BOTH lives - why can't it?
26 posted on 05/23/2003 5:42:26 PM PDT by cgk (It is liberal dogma that human life is an accident - Linda Bowles (r.i.p.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: HairOfTheDog; Long Cut; All
ping to post #26.
27 posted on 05/23/2003 5:43:41 PM PDT by cgk (It is liberal dogma that human life is an accident - Linda Bowles (r.i.p.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: A-teamMom
Thank you.
28 posted on 05/23/2003 5:44:15 PM PDT by cgk (It is liberal dogma that human life is an accident - Linda Bowles (r.i.p.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: cgk
Thank you, that is a much better answer than "you soul-less wench".
29 posted on 05/23/2003 5:46:08 PM PDT by HairOfTheDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
That was a major point of contention for me as well. If at that time, had the baby not been developing normally, and had there been an inherent risk to the mother, then I understand, as they had already scheduled the abortion, they would have performed it. That they did not, says a lot.
30 posted on 05/23/2003 5:46:33 PM PDT by cgk (It is liberal dogma that human life is an accident - Linda Bowles (r.i.p.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: HairOfTheDog
I understand. But I can't read about someone hearing a baby's heartbeat in one instance, and reading about doctors choosing NOT to perform the abortion they had scheduled, and it rips my own heart out to hear a JUDGE got involved and will now make the decision for all concerned. A woman saying "my baby no more" may very well be a question, not a statement of "choice." This is a tough case for all involved, and I cannot completely place myself in the position of any of the "players." (I can't think of a better term right now, no offense meant.)

I have MS and found out I was pregnant. It was suggested to me that I terminate so as not to jeopardize my own health, as MS medication was not conducive for "fetus development." I chose to skip the meds, keep the baby I felt I had been blessed with, and you can see the result in my profile. That is just one reason this issue is so sensitive for me. I apologize if I offended you.

31 posted on 05/23/2003 5:50:49 PM PDT by cgk (It is liberal dogma that human life is an accident - Linda Bowles (r.i.p.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: dogbyte12
Those who believe abortion should be used as birth control, and equate it's moral signifigance as to a hangnail procedure, and those who think mentally retarded raped, physically at risk women should be forced to give birth are equal evils.

I understand the point you are trying to make, but I don't see them as equal evils. It is not certain that bringing this baby to term will kill the mother, while it is certain that aborting the baby will kill him or her, and the baby is not at fault for being conceived during an act of rape. They are not equal evils at all.

Although, I would defer to the grandmother's judgment in this because we never have nor will live in a perfectly just world, and this decision to abort doesn't seem to have been taken without serious consideration.

It is not unlike the rationale we used to assuage the guilt we felt at the killing of innocent Iraqi children in the service of a greater good.

32 posted on 05/23/2003 5:51:31 PM PDT by AlbionGirl (A kite flies highest against the wind, not with it. - Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: dogbyte12
It would seem that a possible risk to a mentally retarded woman with serious health problems outweighs a definite and fatal solution for a currently normally developing baby. Nothing in the article indicates the woman is in particular danger right now, only that a late-term pregnancy might be dangerous. I'm not ignoring the problems, but why not wait and see if anything adverse actually starts before killing the child?
33 posted on 05/23/2003 5:54:07 PM PDT by skr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: cgk
You didn't offend me, but you did represent a conservative view on this to be pretty dang uncaring for the really heartbreaking circumstance that this is. Many lurkers, many people on the fence on this issue are not going to read responses like that one and think you have an ounce of compassion. They may decide that the other side appears to care more... It is important.
34 posted on 05/23/2003 5:54:53 PM PDT by HairOfTheDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: dogbyte12; All
*"Pray for this mother, this daughter, and pray to God that this rapist is caught."*

And also for the soul of this innocent baby.
35 posted on 05/23/2003 5:57:38 PM PDT by getmeouttaPalmBeachCounty_FL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: cgk
Again, we come up to issues unforseen though. I work with children with seizures and with brain fluid accumulation. Today this woman could be fine, but there could also be a point of no return later. Honestly, let's not kid ourselves, this is an extremely risky pregnancy.

The stresses put on this woman's body at 2 months is not the same as it will be at 6 months. People with seizure disorder, who are not pregnant, often become unaffected by their medication. Brain damage can occur from massive seizures. If this happens during a critical moment in the pregnancy, I do have a genuine concern that Russian roulette will be played with this woman's life.

Let's try to play with her meds just enough to help her seizures "We believe"... so as not to damage the baby.

This is heart wrenching and it stinks. Her mother's first concern is her child though.

What risk becomes too great? That is the key question I believe. If there is a nominal chance of med probs, then there isn't an issue. For me at least, if there is a 90/100% chance of severe medical complications, sadly the abortion must occur.

I am pro-life. I believe that there should not be selective abortion. This one bugs me though. I just don't know how to draw the line in health risk cases. This woman is mentally unable to give consent to risk her life to deliver a child.

Her mother's choice is terrible. She is saving the one she knows. I hope people will not think of her unfavorably. Not one among us would want to make this decision.

If she didn't do this and her daughter died, and took the baby with her... could you imagine living with that? Her choice as it is, is difficult enough. She needs our prayers.

36 posted on 05/23/2003 5:58:59 PM PDT by dogbyte12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
Those who advocate kiling the unborn will twist the facts in any case to suit their needs. I am personally against abortion for any reason. I was trying to soften his rant against those of us who draw a line in the sand and say we cannot kill children in utero.
37 posted on 05/23/2003 5:59:27 PM PDT by A-teamMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: AlbionGirl
From personal experience, I know Judge Rothenberg is a very thoughtful man. He is not a knee-jerk lib/rad. I doubt this decision was easy for him. The grandmother's wishes probably decided this case.
38 posted on 05/23/2003 6:05:37 PM PDT by exDem from Miami
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: cgk
Praise God for your healthy baby!!! May He continue to sustain you in your battle with MS.

One of my sweet sons had a terrible deformity and went to God hand in hand with his twin brother. I would carry them again in an instant, even knowing how it would end. They are gifts and their short time on earth was exactly as God had planned it.

I would gladly take this woman's child, deformed or not.
39 posted on 05/23/2003 6:06:00 PM PDT by A-teamMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: A-teamMom
Those who advocate kiling the unborn will twist the facts in any case to suit their needs. I am personally against abortion for any reason. I was trying to soften his rant against those of us who draw a line in the sand and say we cannot kill children in utero.

I think you are being a bit harsh here. I am for making elective abortion illegal. I am not an advocate of killing the unborn and I resent the implications. In my ideal world, there would be dozens of abortions per year. Only in cases similar to this, and all others would be outlawed.

I don't consider the convienance factor, or the fact that the woman decided not to wait, or use condoms, or decide that her figure would look bad if she had a kid.

The medical issue is something I feel strongly about however. My gentle criticism of some people on the no exceptions side is that the life of the matter does matter as much as the baby's life. It is not a simple moral issue here, where selective abortion is easy to denounce.

I am just trying to get some understanding here. What is your line? Is there one? If hypothetically a woman is told that she has a 90% chance of death delivering a child, should she be allowed to save her life? 80% chance? 100% chance?

What risk level should a mentally retarded woman with uncontrolled seizures, and fluid build up in the brain, who was raped be ordered to accept? I honestly don't know. I wrestle with it. My opinion would be different if there were no health concerns, but life can be messy, and for those of us who don't have all the answers, we struggle, and we pray.

40 posted on 05/23/2003 6:06:27 PM PDT by dogbyte12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-195 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