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 ... 221-240241-260261-280 ... 521-524 next last
To: Eagle Eye; bcsco
God isn't very proud of your actions right now even though He still loves you.

Wow, are you the oracle of God that you feel you have the authority to speak for Him?

241 posted on 04/06/2010 10:56:04 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 236 | View Replies]

To: metmom
I am a Christian so of course I have authority to speak for God. Isn't yours a silly question?

2Cr 5:20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech [you] by us: we pray [you] in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.

And if God doesn't talk to you then that says volumes about your spiritual walk with him.

242 posted on 04/06/2010 10:59:37 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 241 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye
Find anything I've written that is consitent to your accusation. I challenge you...I beg you...find where I've written that a (human) fetus is not human.

Pay close attention to what I originally wrote:
No, you are the one with the Obamaspeak if you don't recognize that a fetus, a child and an adult are all HUMAN BEINGS.

I was very clear when I used the word IF; so, if you don't, you don't.

And you are proving my point of the blatant dishonesty in pro lifers like you!

Where have I been dishonest?

Again, I challenge you to find anything I've said that advocates or "pushes" abortion.

Let's try another reading comprehension exercise:
The only muddling on this thread has been by those pushing abortion.

Now, if I had used the phrase "you and others pushing abortion," you would have a valid point; however, I didn't so you don't.

You are no different than the race baiters. Same spirit of lies.

Except you have failed to demonstrate any dishonesty on my part. Trust me, there are plenty of people on FR who actually are pushing abortion, I have no reason to falsely accuse anyone.

243 posted on 04/06/2010 11:01:39 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 240 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye; bcsco
God given common sense says then that if there is no life then there is no murder.

Typical pro-abort/pro-choice justification for supporting abortion, is that if there is no life or it's not human, then there is no murder, therefore by declaring that at some stage of a human's life that it's not really human or not really alive, then abortion is not murder.

But your *God given common sense* falls short because it's not just ending any life that's murder, but ending HUMAN life is murder. Putting down an animal is not murder even if it's ending a life.

If you don't want to be accused of being pro-abortion, then you need to stop carrying their banner for them. As long as you post pro-abortion arguments, you're going to be called pro-abortion no matter how much you deny it.

244 posted on 04/06/2010 11:03:12 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 228 | View Replies]

To: metmom

So I challenged your world view that life begins and conception and that all abortion is murder by showing you were the Bible disagrees with you.

The Bible says (here I am speaking for God...lol) that the life of the flesh is in the blood.

And we know from science that there is no blood flow for several weeks after conception.

That would seem to logically indicate that without blood there is no life and without life there is no murder.

Did I at any time say that abortion was a good thing or that I approved? I don’t think so yet your cohorts have openly accused me of such. Will you also?


245 posted on 04/06/2010 11:04:50 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 241 | View Replies]

To: metmom
As long as you post pro-abortion arguments, you're going to be called pro-abortion no matter how much you deny it.

You need to find an actual statement that supports your accusation, not just your convoluted logic to prove your own point.

Some people say that killing animals is murder. Just because they say it doens't make them right.

Just because you accuse me of being pro abortion doesn't make it so, it just shows a basic lack of honesty on your behalf just like the race baiters and your tactics are very similar to Sharton's.

When someone disagrees with you, play the pro abort card just like he plays the race card. It used to work.

Now all it does is show off your dishonesty.

246 posted on 04/06/2010 11:10:14 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 244 | View Replies]

To: bcsco; wagglebee

Common sense alone would tell you that the fetus is human and living from the time of conception on. Even those who don’t give Scripture any credence, still have to get around two issues.

One being that the genetic make-up of the fetus is that of a human being, with any one random cell selected from that fetus containing the same DNA distinguishing it as a separate living individual would any random cell selected from that same individual as a grown adult.

The other is that as long as cell division and multiplication is going on, the fetus is growing. If it’s growing, taking in nutrients to do so, respiring in the way that is natural to it, it’s alive.

So these pro-abortionists who want to reject Scripture as support for determining the humanity of the person from conception on, still run smack into scientific support for it. They just can’t win. There’s no justification for determining a fetus not human at any stage in its development other than it’s simply the preference of the pro-abortion apologist.

They’d be better off just admitting their position is based strictly on personal preference than going through the kinds of contortions and convoluted reasoning that makes them looks like the irrational fools and hypocrites they present themselves as.


247 posted on 04/06/2010 11:14:24 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 233 | View Replies]

To: metmom

Attacking the messenger doesn’t change the message, does it?

Can early term abortion be wrong without being murder?

Or can you only make your case if you use the strongest, emotionally charged words possible?

But what if there is no life (as described in Leviticus) until several weeks into pregnancy? What if the Bible is actually correct on this?

Can abortion still be wrong without being murder? Sure.

Oh darn, I failed again to carry the pro abortion banner by calling abortion wrong.


248 posted on 04/06/2010 11:14:55 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 244 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye

How can you call yourself a Christian and support the murder of a baby?


249 posted on 04/06/2010 11:15:14 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 242 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
It's interesting how one takes a passage from Leviticus, which is about atonement for sin through the sacrifice of animals, and warps it to mean that if there is no blood at conception, there is no life, so the abortion of a fetus can't be murder. 'Warps' is very operable term, IMO.

This is cherry picking at its extreme. The passage reads: "Lev 17:11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it for you on the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that makes atonement by the life."

First, 'blood is life' is true enough. But how that can be construed that life only begins at birth is absurd. Does a fetus miraculously acquire blood at the moment of birth? Of course not. Blood is intrinsic in a fetus' development. Therefore if blood is a quantifier for life (their argument), a fetus has life in the womb.

But that is still a straw-dog argument. The passage selected has nothing to do with conception, babies, fetuses, or anything to do with human form. It is a commandment from God on the use of animal sacrifices, and an admonition to man not to eat or drink blood for the condemnation it brings: "Lev 17:14 For the life of every creature is its blood: its blood is its life. Therefore I have said to the people of Israel, You shall not eat the blood of any creature, for the life of every creature is its blood. Whoever eats it shall be cut off."

I've been accused of cherry picking passages that suit my viewpoint while ignoring the one that is important in the life cycle of a fetus - child - adult. Yeah, right. And by the cherry-picker extremist no less.

Waste no more time on this tool. He's not worth the effort.

250 posted on 04/06/2010 11:15:37 AM PDT by bcsco (Obama: Hokus Pokus POTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 239 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye; wagglebee
ind anything I've written that is consitent to your accusation. I challenge you...I beg you...find where I've written that a (human) fetus is not human.

Post 198...."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."

If you don't consider that ending the life of the fetus within the first month, when you claim there is no blood, is not murder, then you declare that it is not human.

251 posted on 04/06/2010 11:20:07 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 240 | View Replies]

To: metmom
Common sense alone would tell you that the fetus is human and living from the time of conception on. Even those who don’t give Scripture any credence, still have to get around two issues.

Check out my post #250. He's using a completely irrelevant Bible passage. He calls himself a Christian. Well, then, he understands he will answer for his beliefs some day. I'm glad I'm not him. An enabler is just as evil as the killer.

252 posted on 04/06/2010 11:22:15 AM PDT by bcsco (Obama: Hokus Pokus POTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 247 | View Replies]

To: metmom
So these pro-abortionists who want to reject Scripture as support for determining the humanity of the person from conception on, still run smack into scientific support for it.

You are talking to the wrong person for that.Your accusations against me hold no water.

The other is that as long as cell division and multiplication is going on, the fetus is growing. If it’s growing, taking in nutrients to do so, respiring in the way that is natural to it, it’s alive.

The Bible says that the life of the flesh is in the blood. Until there is blood there is not life per the Bible.

All kinds of organisms undergo the process you describe but the Bible says that the life of the flesh is in the blood. Plants may be alive but until someone shows me different, they do not have the same kind of life that mammals do.

It seems that you want to reject scripture because it does not fit with your beliefs.

You haven't seen me write anything disrespectful towards early stage human fetus or even suggest that they aren't human.

What I have suggested is that if these cells do not carry blood then there is no life as described by the Bible. If you not like that then maybe you need to get the wrtings changed to suit your beliefs!

253 posted on 04/06/2010 11:24:45 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 247 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Let me say this: While it is terrible for any woman to have to bear a child of some scum bag rapist, it is not the fault of the child and the child should not be killed. Put it up for adoption as soon as it is born, fine, but to kill it makes the mother, and her family, as bad as the criminal who attacked her.


254 posted on 04/06/2010 11:26:17 AM PDT by calex59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye; bcsco
The Bible says (here I am speaking for God...lol) that the life of the flesh is in the blood. And we know from science that there is no blood flow for several weeks after conception. That would seem to logically indicate that without blood there is no life and without life there is no murder.

Are plants alive? Jelly fish? Flatworms? Single celled bacteria? Amoebas? Protozoa? They have no blood. By your "reasoning" (for lack of a better term) they aren't alive.

255 posted on 04/06/2010 11:27:34 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 245 | View Replies]

To: bcsco
Life being in the blood is even deeper than your post suggests and is one of the reasons that it was forbidden in the diet.

Now you want to define life differently than what the Bible does, fine with me.

256 posted on 04/06/2010 11:28:03 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 250 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye
Can abortion still be wrong without being murder? Sure.

On what basis then?

Your pro-abortion cohort hasn't answered that question either.

You get a chance now.

257 posted on 04/06/2010 11:29:12 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 248 | View Replies]

To: metmom
Are plants alive? Jelly fish? Flatworms? Single celled bacteria? Amoebas? Protozoa? They have no blood. By your "reasoning" (for lack of a better term) they aren't alive.

Already answered. But maybe you need to do a bit of research on that to see for yourself.

258 posted on 04/06/2010 11:29:13 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 255 | View Replies]

To: calex59; wagglebee

Remember that the pro-aborts use these “hard cases” in order to justify ALL cases.

Let’s work on restricting the “I won’t fit my prom dress” abortions first,
and we’ll handle the hard cases later, after the easy ones are addressed.


259 posted on 04/06/2010 11:30:58 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 254 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye

FAIL....

What a cop out.


260 posted on 04/06/2010 11:31:04 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 258 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280 ... 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