10-year-old girl reportedly forced to leave Ohio for legal abortion

On a recent episode of “Meet the Press,” NBC News’ Chuck Todd asked Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson what would happen if a 13-year-old in his home state got pregnant after being raped by a family member. “Do you feel good about that?” the host early

The Republican governor reluctantly admitted that if a 13-year-old Arkansan becomes pregnant after being raped by a family member, that pregnancy cannot be terminated voluntarily. Before the Supreme Court fell Roe v. Wadean abortion would have been a legal option for that child, but not anymore.

About the same time, Philip Gunn, the Speaker of the Mississippi Republican state house, pondered a similar question and said abortion should even be illegal for a 12-year-old who has been raped by a family member.

In both cases, these GOP officials were asked about hypothetical scenarios involving impregnated children. Every now and then, however, the public is confronted with a scenario that, in fact, seems to be rooted. The Indianapolis Star Tribune reported

On Monday, three days after the Supreme Court made its landmark decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, Dr. Caitlin Bernard, an obstetrician-gynecologist in Indianapolis, receives a call from a colleague, a child abuse physician in Ohio. Hours after the Supreme Court action, Buckeye had banned all abortions after six weeks. Now this doctor had a 10-year-old patient in the office who was six weeks and three days pregnant. Could Bernard help?

Although details about the child have been withheld, it appears that the girl was supposed to be taken care of in Indiana last week.

For context, of course, it’s worth emphasizing that this door will soon be closed as well: Indiana’s Republican governor and the Republican-led legislature are pushing ahead with plans to impose new abortion restrictions. But because the state of Hoosier didn’t act as quickly as Ohio to restrict reproductive rights, the 10-year-old girl’s doctor was able to pursue an out-of-state option.

Indiana General Assembly meets in special session later this month debating a new abortion ban.

Will a true story like this cause some Republicans to rethink their positions? CNN’s Dana Bash pressured South Dakota government Kristi Noem on this point.

When the host asked the Republican governor, who is said to be eyeing a potential presidential campaign, whether her state would “force a 10-year-old in that same situation to have a baby,” Noem called the story “tragic,” but actually gave admitted that South Dakota would, in effect, force a 10-year-old in the same situation to have a baby.

†[E]very single life – every life is precious, “Name said† “This tragedy is horrific. I can’t even imagine. I’ve never had anyone in my family or myself experience anything like this. I can’t even imagine. But in South Dakota, the law now is that abortions are illegal, except to save the mother’s life.”

The governor added“What I would say is, I don’t believe that a tragic situation should be perpetuated by another tragedy.”

Circle back to our recent coverageIf nothing else, there is undeniable consistency in such a view: Terminating an unwanted pregnancy is wrong, the argument goes, regardless of the circumstances. If that means the government will force raped 10-year-old children to undergo unwanted pregnancies, so be it.

The question for the rest of the public is whether they should vote for policymakers who hold such a view.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.