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 ... 321-340341-360361-380 ... 521-524 next last
To: Eagle Eye; P-Marlowe; wagglebee; little jeremiah; Alamo-Girl; betty boop
Do I need to repeat that I don't think abortions should happen?

Nope. I understand that. I'm doing what P-Marlowe challenged: Attempting to find a biblical basis for "life" beginning prior to blood forming.

I've never worked on it before.

Yet, I've no doubt it is the the truth based on the Jeremiah verse in which God says that He knew Jeremiah before Jeremiah was formed in the womb.

Also, Christ left His estate with God and took the form of a human through the mechanism of the Holy Spirit overshadowing Mary. Her "seed" was to bruise the head of the serpent, therefore, Mary did contribute her seed in the equation. That seed was at one point pre-blood, but it was also the incarnated, second person of the Trinity.

Are we saying it lacked "life" EVEN THOUGH it was the eternal second person of the blessed Trinity?

341 posted on 04/07/2010 10:15:35 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 339 | View Replies]

To: xzins; P-Marlowe

I think the case can also be made that because Christ was fully human that ANY human characteristics He had would also be shared by us.


342 posted on 04/07/2010 10:20:48 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 341 | View Replies]

To: bcsco
From a biblical position, that has been argued here.

I thought you were done posting to me. :-)

343 posted on 04/07/2010 10:25:34 AM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 340 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee; P-Marlowe; Eagle Eye

Excellent point. It is a necessary addition to the case of His own birth to extend that same logic to ourselves.


344 posted on 04/07/2010 10:25:57 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 342 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
I thought you were done posting to me. :-)

Yet you keep pinging me. I saw something you apparently overlooked so I made you aware of it. Does that equate to joining in the discussion? I haven't replied to any of your other pings, have I?

345 posted on 04/07/2010 10:30:18 AM PDT by bcsco (Obama: Hokus Pokus POTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 343 | View Replies]

To: bcsco
I haven't replied to any of your other pings, have I?

Are you counting this one?

346 posted on 04/07/2010 10:39:06 AM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
Are you counting this one?

What part of "other" don't you understand?

347 posted on 04/07/2010 10:40:45 AM PDT by bcsco (Obama: Hokus Pokus POTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 346 | View Replies]

To: xzins; Eagle Eye; P-Marlowe; wagglebee; little jeremiah; Alamo-Girl; betty boop
Nope. I understand that. I'm doing what P-Marlowe challenged: Attempting to find a biblical basis for "life" beginning prior to blood forming.

Arguments in regard to that issue are clearly esoteric and subject to varied interpretations, However, the "life is in the blood" argument is concrete. If the life is in the blood, then it is clear that the presence of a heartbeat signifies "life" as defined by the Bible. Any interpretation of life beginning before that point must necessarily rely on some esoteric interpretation of some obscure passage that may or may not relate to the issue.

Ultimately there must be a concrete basis for imposing laws upon people to protect the "life" of the unborn. If the issue is all cloudy and subject to diverse interpretations, then we will never be able to draft legislation to protect the unborn. I therefore believe that the presence of a heartbeat is sufficient evidence (both biblically and biologically) of "life" to require the state to institute measures to protect that "life".

I do not believe we will ever reach a legal consensus that life begins at conception or that contraception should be outlawed to protect the life of the unconceived.

I'm being a realist here.

348 posted on 04/07/2010 10:47:32 AM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 341 | View Replies]

To: bcsco
What part of "other" don't you understand?

I don't know, maybe I'm just dense.

Are we friends yet?

349 posted on 04/07/2010 10:48:13 AM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 347 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe

There’s nothing you should take personally or feel bad about. I’m simply tired of the back-and-forth with people who would rather quibble and obfuscate than debate.

I didn’t consider my pointing out that a statement you made had already been covered as ‘participating’. Perhaps I was wrong. I apologize.


350 posted on 04/07/2010 10:52:34 AM PDT by bcsco (Obama: Hokus Pokus POTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 349 | View Replies]

To: bcsco
I’m simply tired of the back-and-forth with people who would rather quibble and obfuscate than debate.

Please point out a single post I have ever made on this forum where I was "quibbling and obfuscating" rather than debating.

If you had bothered to read my posts before losing your cool, you would have been able to see that I was making some serious points and not "quibbling and obfuscating" as you have accused me of doing.

I didn’t consider my pointing out that a statement you made had already been covered as ‘participating’. Perhaps I was wrong. I apologize.

You are still participating. I bet you even respond to this post.

351 posted on 04/07/2010 10:56:54 AM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 350 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
Please point out a single post I have ever made on this forum where I was "quibbling and obfuscating" rather than debating.

I wasn't speaking of you. Sorry if you took it that way. I was referring to the tack the thread took yesterday before you arrived. So, yes, I did respond to this post to clear the air between you and I. I do NOT see how that is continuing a participation in the overall discussion on abortion.

So, to make you happy, I will not post to you again. For whatever reason, on whatever thread. Now you should be elated.

352 posted on 04/07/2010 11:01:40 AM PDT by bcsco (Obama: Hokus Pokus POTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 351 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe; wagglebee; Eagle Eye

At this point, I’m not focused on legal interpretations and what the state does or doesn’t do.

I’m focused on the challenge of biblical interpretation for life beginning at conception.

I believe that I just proved it to a BIBLICAL CHRISTIAN, and that it wasn’t esoteric.

One must ask at which point the “in utero, incarnate, second person of the trinity” was NOT life.


353 posted on 04/07/2010 11:08:26 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 348 | View Replies]

To: bcsco
I do NOT see how that is continuing a participation in the overall discussion on abortion.

Are you saying that it is your intention never to post or debate the issue of abortion again?

Or is it that you just don't want to participate in any discussion that I am involved in on the subject (which is just about every pro-life thread on this forum).

So, to make you happy, I will not post to you again. For whatever reason, on whatever thread. Now you should be elated.

Actually it makes me sad. :-(

Feel free to post to me anytime. I never shirk from a debate. I understood you to say that you were basically done posting to me. Then you posted to me again. And then another time. And now this time.

Are we friends now?

354 posted on 04/07/2010 11:29:02 AM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 352 | View Replies]

To: xzins; wagglebee
At this point, I’m not focused on legal interpretations and what the state does or doesn’t do.

But that is the point of the thread. The issue is what do we do in cases of rape or incest? Do we outlaw any procedure which would stop the embryo from attaching itself to the uterus because that would be murder?

The legal question then becomes, when and why would we call that murder and under what circumstances, if any should we conclude that anything less than a viable fetus is a "life" that must be protected at the expense of the liberty of the mother?

Now you can make a theological argument that life begins at the moment of conception, but then that argument is not concrete. You have to have a "secular" definintion in order to restrict the liberty of the mother. It also has to be a definition that will appeal to the vast majority of the citizens of this country.

Since we measure the end of life by the last heartbeat, it is not unreasonable to measure the beginning of life by the first heartbeat. This would solve the issue of what to do in cases of rape as there are means of keeping the egg from attaching to the uterus even before the first heartbeat.

But to deny a rape victim the opportunity to prevent a pregnancy that has not yet occurred is not going to go over too well with the majority of citizens in this nation.

So then the question becomes are we willing to continue to allow indiscriminate abortion on demand because we must insist that we need to protect the life of an embryo that has not yet even attached itself to it's mother's womb?

355 posted on 04/07/2010 11:40:05 AM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 353 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe; xzins
But to deny a rape victim the opportunity to prevent a pregnancy that has not yet occurred is not going to go over too well with the majority of citizens in this nation.

My personal opinion is that I can think of no legitimate precedent among civilized people where a child is executed for the crime of his or her father.

As a realist, I know that it will be IMPOSSIBLE to tell rape victims that they must carry a baby to term.

That being said, rape victims have ample access to the morning after pill and, while I am opposed to this, I think it might make the most sense for rape victims.

356 posted on 04/07/2010 12:03:05 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 355 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
From a biblical position it could be argued that life begins before conception. Jeremiah 1:5

hmm. It says that we are formed in the womb. Conception takes place outside of the womb. I think you had better pick another passage.

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations."

357 posted on 04/07/2010 12:12:54 PM PDT by ColdWater ("The theory of evolution really has no bearing on what I'm trying to accomplish with FR anyway. ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 336 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater; P-Marlowe; xzins
It says that we are formed in the womb. Conception takes place outside of the womb. I think you had better pick another passage.

There are no words in ancient Hebrew for vagina, uterus, fallopian tubes or ovaries. In the Bible, the term womb encompasses the entire female reproductive system.

358 posted on 04/07/2010 12:18:00 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 357 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe; xzins; Alamo-Girl; Quix; Eagle Eye; wagglebee; little jeremiah
I do not believe we will ever reach a legal consensus that life begins at conception or that contraception should be outlawed to protect the life of the unconceived. I'm being a realist here.

I agree with you, P-Marlowe. But then, I'm a realist, too.

It seems to me there cannot really be a "legal consensus" without an underlying social/moral consensus. Which evidently we do lack.

Under the circumstances, it seems to me the best the law can do is to mitigate the damage to Life occasioned by a society increasingly callous on life issues, from cradle to grave.

Thank you so much, P-Marlowe, for your insightful essay/post!

359 posted on 04/07/2010 12:34:56 PM PDT by betty boop (The personal is not the public's business. See: the Ninth Amendment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 348 | View Replies]

To: betty boop; P-Marlowe; xzins; Alamo-Girl; little jeremiah
It seems to me there cannot really be a "legal consensus" without an underlying social/moral consensus. Which evidently we do lack.

That's an understatement! The culture of death's new push is to be allowed to systematically kill those who are most certainly alive.

360 posted on 04/07/2010 12:40:36 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 359 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 321-340341-360361-380 ... 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