The information available here is (rightly) limited and the court is meant to rule on the specific question put before it rather than anything wider but there does seem to be some glaring questions and contradictions which feel like they should have been addressed and resolved by someone. The big question is around the ruling stating that the girl is "parentless" but has a guardian and she says the guardian is "fine" with her decision to have an abortion. Normally that should be sufficient but there is clearly something not being explained here. My main issues is that this appeals ruling still reports this as an unanswered question yet the guardian (or a representative of them) was present when the judge was talking to the girl. I don't see why the initial judge couldn't clarify that question there and then. I wonder whether the girl is a ward of the state and though her assigned guardian, in their individual professional opinion, agrees with the girl that an abortion would be the best option, there is some kind of legal or policy issue preventing a state guardian approving an abortion. I can't think of any other situation where the guardian nominally agrees but this legal case was still deemed necessary. Regardless, it surely should have been clarified in the original case. There is also the question of adoption that isn't even mentioned, odd given the reasoning the girl gives is all based around her ability to raise a child. Again, this may be outside the formal scope within the rules of the court but someone should have been discussing this option with the girl and I get the impression that she isn't receiving the level of support and guidance she should be. In general, I wouldn't consider this an abortion issue but a wider one about the treatment of older minors who aren't under the care of their parents or similar individual guardians. It's unfortunate that the abortion argument is so loud and dominating in the US that nothing else can get heard. Does this mean that you believe if a woman/girl is deemed mature enough, it is (and should be) permitted for them to freely make an informed choice of an abortion (at least this early term)?
How do you know he isn't? The fathers legal situation isn't relevant to the question so it likely wouldn't be mentioned in the ruling (even if it was discussed with the judge). So, we have no idea about the father, though since Florida has a "Romeo and Juliet" element to their consent laws, there is a good chance the conception wasn't result of an illegal act anyway. The identity and general situation of the father could be a factor and again, may well have been discussed but not deemed relevant. Remember, the question here is only whether the girl has the right to choose to seek an abortion. Anything directly relating to the father (such as requirements to identify him or inform him of the abortion) would be part of that process itself and so not relevant to whether the girl is legally able to initiate it or not.
So she IS mature enough to handle giving up her baby ??? Nope, she hasn't had a baby yet so she isn't a mother........ a woman who miscarries is NOT a mother. And maybe pigs could fly...maybe they don't want the kid...
it's wrong to force rape victims to have their rapists babies... or anyone to have a baby for that mater
It's very revealing that YOU think it is easier to abort it instead. You think the psychological separation difficulty will be less? Sounds like one of those psychotic people who kill their lover so "no one else can have them".
And she doesn't have to be a mother. The simple act of giving birth will not make her any more of a mother than she already is.
Yes, well, as we've already covered, she was not a rape victim. So this has nothing to do with the issue in this story.
actually it does, not sure where you heard that - if the child was forced to have a baby, she would be the child's biological mother
Even more interesting that you think forced adoption is the easier option You seem oblivious to the international scandal of the Catholic Church and the forced adoption practices they profited off https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2019/05/why-more-women-dont-choose-adoption/589759/
FoxHastings said: ↑ So she IS mature enough to handle giving up her baby ??? I never said that. Sounds like one of those psychotic people who make things up....
Um, let's see... Maybe because the pregnancy was at 10 weeks gestation? If she had been raped, she would have had advanced notice that something could be up. (Something females having continued sexual relations over a long period of time may not be aware of)
How do you know? You are making an assumption that giving a baby up for adoption is less traumatic than having an abortion
Makes no sense if the rapist was someone in a position of authority then often the woman is reluctant to report. What if the father is her “guardian” and even though she does not want sex with him feels as if she must consent or she becomes homeless
Again, you have no idea of what she wants - you are just mouthing what you think she SHOULD want. You can never be taken seriously, until you treat women as individuals.
I saw that headline today and laughed my ass off. Not mature enough for abortion, but mature enough to support a child for 18 yrs. What stupidity.
if she is not mature enough to decide not to have a baby, then was she mature enough to give consent?
they are not the same thing, but if one is mature enough to have sex, they are mature enough to decide not to have a baby by your logic, if the government decided to force her to abort, that would be ok too?