|
|
Exceptions for Rape and Incest
Posted on October 25, 2006 by Moderator
|
|
Some Abortion Ban proponents point out that most rape is acquaintance rape and most incest is repeated abuse. They claim that perpetrators (boyfriends, family members, family friends, etc.) obtain abortions for these young victims to cover their crimes of abuse. They argue that Planned Parenthood inadvertently protects abusers by eliminating the evidence of their crimes.
Planned Parenthood says they are required by law to report incest and abuse. A law in SD even that requires PP to ask abortion patients who are under the age of 16, the age of their sex partner, if they know it. If the partner was more than 3 years older, PP is required, by statute, to report immediately to law enforcement.
Have your opponents raised this issue in forums or debates? Do you think abortions "eliminate the evidence" of abuse? What would you do in the Legislature to ensure more protection for victims of abuse?
|
|
Candidate Responses
|
|
Rape and Incest
|
To my knowledge no one has brought up this idea at a forum or debate, although I have read about this line of reasoning in letters to the editor. I think many people get caught in rhetoric on this subject and try to lead others into certain lines of reasoning to attempt to prove their point. I think this is one of those attempts. Please see my comments on HB 1215 for my views on the real ways we can reduce unwanted pregnancies in South Dakota.
|
|
Posted By Pam Hemmingsen on October 26, 2006 9:55
|
|
Rape and incest
|
|
This question has two parts. First, do I think abortion eliminates the evidence of abuse? That's quite a response crafted by the pro-life side to say a woman or teen should not have an abortion. My perspective is 1. abortion does not hide the abuse; the victim will live with that trauma the rest of her life. It should be up to her and her family to make the decision about whether or not they want to continue with the pregnancy. There can be lots of reasons why they decide not to and just as many reasons why they might want to complete the pregnancy. That person and her support system, if she has one, are in a much better place to make a choice based on knowing the circumstances of their lives. The argument about abortion destroying evidence of abuse is completely specious. For some it will be entirely an abusive thing to complete the pregancy, for others it won't. To make an extreme statement about abortion erasing the evidence of abuse is a very narrow perspective. The second part of the question is how do we protect people from sexual abuse. One way is through education, about their bodies, about preventing pregnancy, about contraception, and about how to avoid potentially dangerous situations. It is another matter when the perpetrator is a family member; that makes it very complex and difficult for a young person. I would disagree with Dr. Oliver who said he was glad his 16 year old patient decided to carry to term the "healthy baby boy" whose father is the young woman's brother. THat satifies Dr. Oliver's needs to prevent a pregnancy. He goes home to his wife and children and life doesn't change for him. This young woman is raising her brother's baby and this is a life long event. What does she say to the child when he/she is old enough to wonder who the father is? What does the child say to peers about the father? The issue here is one of extreme complexity and it is never as easy as just keep the baby and it will all be fine.
|
|
Posted By Suzan Nolan on October 27, 2006 14:33
|
|
|
Comments
|
|
There are no comments available.
|
|
Post a Comment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
