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 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 521-524 next last
To: Hank Kerchief
An infant has been born, and fetus has not. I think even you can understand that.

Another emotion based argument that ignore all fact to cling to dogma.

Even if we accept your contention, a fetus, left alone becomes life. By surgically intervening via abortion, you prevent that life from being achieved. Thus even using your emotion based context, Abortion is murder.

And I know what your simplistic mind is going to come up with next. "Well then birth control is murder".

No it is not.

The egg, or the sperm, cannot become life until they combine. By preventing that combination, you prevent the potential for life from being created. Thus until conception the potential to become life does not exist. After conception it does.

After conception, unless you surgically intervene via abortion, the fetus will become, even under your warped context, life. Thus even if you accept your assumptions about when life starts, you must accept the fact that abortion is murder.

181 posted on 04/06/2010 8:00:09 AM PDT by MNJohnnie (We are sorry Senator, you have the Rinovirus. Afraid that is terminal. There is no cure..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief
I sorry but until you actually address the points I made to you in a calm rational adult fashion, it is impossible to take your sloganeering and emotion base ranting seriously.

If you want me to take your posting seriously you will have to try actually addressing the argument I made in a calm, rational fashion not just scream you next set of per-programmed slogans in order to avoid having to address the facts rationally.

182 posted on 04/06/2010 8:03:41 AM PDT by MNJohnnie (We are sorry Senator, you have the Rinovirus. Afraid that is terminal. There is no cure..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: bcsco

“We live in sin.”

Speak for yourself.


183 posted on 04/06/2010 8:05:21 AM PDT by Hank Kerchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: bcsco

“’I am not an atheist. I just don’t believe in God.’

So, what deities do you believe in?”

I’m not a theist.

Hank


184 posted on 04/06/2010 8:07:22 AM PDT by Hank Kerchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief
Speak for yourself.

So, you commit no sin?

185 posted on 04/06/2010 8:08:23 AM PDT by bcsco (Obama: Hokus Pokus POTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: bcsco

So, you commit no sin?

I have no idea what you mean by sin.

If by sin, you mean what you do. No, I never do that.

Hank


186 posted on 04/06/2010 8:11:03 AM PDT by Hank Kerchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief
I’m not a theist.

Then you ARE an atheist. The definition of theist is the belief in at least one deity. The definition of atheism is the position that there are no deities. Either you completely misunderstand the meaning of atheist, and are an atheist, or are a deist in some sense. Which is it?

187 posted on 04/06/2010 8:12:54 AM PDT by bcsco (Obama: Hokus Pokus POTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief; MNJohnnie; bcsco; metmom; xzins; Coleus; narses; BykrBayb; floriduh voter; ...
I am not an atheist. I just don’t believe in God.

Yeah we know:

You're not an anarchist, you just don't believe in government...
You're against abortion, you just don't want to abolish it...

You would make a great leftist politician.

188 posted on 04/06/2010 8:13:37 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief

What is your conception of sin?


189 posted on 04/06/2010 8:13:46 AM PDT by bcsco (Obama: Hokus Pokus POTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee; Hank Kerchief

As I pointed out in post #187, Hank is as completely messed up on his atheism as he is on his anarchism and abortion.

Hank, you really need to back off on getting into these debates until you have a better understanding of yourself.


190 posted on 04/06/2010 8:17:16 AM PDT by bcsco (Obama: Hokus Pokus POTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: bcsco; Hank Kerchief

I wonder why he is here at all, we are just “vile” conservatives.


191 posted on 04/06/2010 8:19:27 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee; Hank Kerchief; xzins; bcsco; Coleus; narses; BykrBayb; floriduh voter; Lesforlife; ...
Your "opposition" to abortion is identical to every liberal politician who is "personally opposed, but."

Hank's opposition to abortion is non-existent at this point because he refuses to say WHY he's opposed to it. He just claims that he is with nothing to back it up. Talk is cheap.

Hank, you have been asked multiple times by multiple people to state your reason for opposing abortion. You've made it clear that you don't think the fetus is a human being and that therefore abortion is not murder. If you don't oppose it on moral grounds and you don't oppose it on political grounds, just why the heck do you oppose it in the first place? Why do you oppose abortion?

Why don't you answer?

192 posted on 04/06/2010 8:20:07 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee; MrB

It never ceases to amaze me the lengths to which people will go justify being able to accuse God of evil.

God’s commandment to not murder is a commandment to MANKIND to not take the life of another human being. It is not man’s place to decide when it is time for a person to die.

God is the author of life and He gives it and He takes it away. The reason God cannot be accused of murder is that even though He may end the physical life of the person, the spiritual life continues, so God didn’t end someone’s life even if that person is removed from this leverl of existence.

Man is not permitted to murder because man is not God and does not have the right over another person to determine their time of death. Since God has claim on every human being by virtue of His creating us and redeeming us, He has that right.


193 posted on 04/06/2010 8:25:56 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: MrB; wagglebee
Atheists DO have a real problem with explaining the existance of evil.

Atheists really ought to have the bigger problem with explaining the existence of good.

194 posted on 04/06/2010 8:27:08 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee; Hank Kerchief; AuntB
I wonder why he is here at all, we are just “vile” conservatives.

I suspect he's a Paulistan who's happy fomenting controversial discussions. We've seen enough to know he has little in the way of a belief system. With him, it's anything that leaves him to his own discretion - as convoluted and thoughtless as that is...

195 posted on 04/06/2010 8:27:40 AM PDT by bcsco (Obama: Hokus Pokus POTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: bcsco; wagglebee; Eagle Eye; Hank Kerchief; xzins; Coleus; narses; BykrBayb; floriduh voter; ...

There’s this verse....

Psalm 51:5 Surely I was sinful at birth,
sinful from the time my mother conceived me.

Only human beings can sin. Here the Bible talks about sin from conception, not just birth. If there were no human, there would be no sin or sinful state.

The humanity of the fetus has been recognized in the past as well. There is the old English common law practice of *pleading the belly*. Although it applied to only cases where the woman was sufficiently along in her pregnancy for detectable movement to be felt, that was merely, no doubt, just a reflection of the available, or lack of available, technology to make any other more precise determination.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pleading_the_belly

Here is the google search link to several other articles about the same concept.

http://www.google.com/search?q=pleading+the+belly&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a


196 posted on 04/06/2010 8:40:34 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: bcsco; Hank Kerchief; AuntB; metmom; MrB

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


197 posted on 04/06/2010 8:42:12 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

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

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

There is no doubt that God calls children a blessing. He also calls abundance and prosperity in other areas blessings.

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.

So without blood there isn't life. Without life there isn't killing. Without killing there isn't murder.

Perhaps that is the reason that causing a miscarriage wasn't punished the same as a murder?

And if we don't ask questions then we are no different that automated obedient robots with no mind or free will of our own.

I did not write the book. But if one is going to build their moral and ethical foundations on Biblical principles then one cannot just do that with those that meet agreement with one's preconceived notions.

So do not mistake my attempt to uphold what the Bible says as justifying abortion.

And making it legal or illegal doesn't change it at all in God's eyes.

198 posted on 04/06/2010 8:45:23 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 156 | View Replies]

To: metmom

Hank, you have been asked multiple times by multiple people to state your reason for opposing abortion. You’ve made it clear that you don’t think the fetus is a human being and that therefore abortion is not murder. If you don’t oppose it on moral grounds and you don’t oppose it on political grounds, just why the heck do you oppose it in the first place? Why do you oppose abortion?

Why don’t you answer?

I’ve answered twice. I happen to think the issue is very important one, not something that can be addressed with twenty work quip. If you are not interested in understanding my reasons, that’s fine.

http://usabig.com/iindv/articles_stand/soccult/abortion.php

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

http://usabig.com/iindv/articles_stand/phil_gen/religion_ten.php

Hank


199 posted on 04/06/2010 8:46:52 AM PDT by Hank Kerchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: bcsco
If you believe humans are capable of governing themselves without some minimal form of self government, then you are a fool. Sorry for the bluntness, but it's deserved.

That wasn't blunt. That was a very kind, gracious, and self-controlled assessment of his condition.

Human beings just MIGHT have some ability to self-govern themselves IF, and that's a very big IF, if they had and adhered to a high moral standard.

Since mankind tends not to lean in that direction, external controls are not only necessary, but absolutely essential, for an orderly and civilized society to even begin to function.

A republic like we have is the best form of government to date that mankind has implemented, but the reason it is not working any more is not because it's the government, but because the people in it have gotten away from what it was really meant to be.

200 posted on 04/06/2010 8:47:15 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 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