11-Year-Old Rape Victim Begged for an Abortion. She Was Forced to Give Birth Instead.

by Guest Fri Mar 01, 2019 10:10 am

After doctors ignored eight different requests for an abortion, the baby was born weighing just over one pound and is not expected to survive.

An 11-year-old Argentinian girl raped by her grandmother’s partner pleaded with her hospital eight separate times for an abortion, advocates say. On Tuesday, at 23 weeks pregnant, she gave birth via cesarean section to a 1.3-lb baby after being denied an abortion for more than a month.

The case of “Lucia,” who is using a pseudonym to protect her privacy, has ignited the debate over abortion in Argentina, where it remains difficult to access the procedure even in cases of rape or health concerns.

Lucia first checked into the hospital in late January complaining of stomach pains, according to local news reports. She eventually revealed to doctors that her grandmother’s 65-year-old partner had sexually abused her. The doctors confirmed she was pregnant, but by then she was already 19 weeks along.

Gustavo Vigliocco, the Secretary of Health of Tucumán, a conservative northern province, initially told Argentine media that officials did not perform an abortion because the child wanted to carry her baby to term. He dismissed safety concerns around the plan, saying the pre-teen was “big in build” and weighed “more than 50 kilos."

But Mariana Paterlini of human rights organization Andhes, which filed a brief in Lucia’s case, told The Daily Beast the girl had requested an abortion eight different times—including at the criminal trial for her abuser, who is currently awaiting sentencing.

Paterlini also dismissed the state’s claims that Lucia’s mother had failed to register her consent for the abortion in a timely manner.

“She didn’t know where to send it because she doesn’t write or read, so she was not completely aware of her rights,” Paterlini said. “She talked with us, her will was public, but nobody helped her … That’s where the state failed.”

https://www.thedailybeast.com/11-year-old-rape-victim-begged-for-an-abortion-she-was-forced-to-give-birth-instead?ref=home

by nicko Fri Mar 01, 2019 10:15 am

Their not the only State that failed their public !

by Syl Fri Mar 01, 2019 12:54 pm

Wonder if Smelly Bandit could give his views on this?

by 'Wolfie Fri Mar 01, 2019 1:40 pm

At least the smelly-bum' trollster will be proud that some equally backward misogynists have yet again fullfilled his perverted anti-humanitarian desires...

And as with smelly' and his similarly-depraved supporters, their faux-religious-backed mission ends with the baby's birth..

True to form, neither the Argentine authorities nor smelly's odious little clique will give even the slightest damn about the welfare of either mother or child.

IF there is a "hell" in smelly's deranged parallel universe, then smelly' and all his like-minded "pro-lifers"/anti-abortionists can rest assured that they already have their seats "down there" reserved..

by Maddog Fri Mar 01, 2019 4:23 pm

This appears to be a government incompetence problem. It seems like the procedure is available, but the system is difficult for people to navigate. Especially those without an education or the ability to read and write.

After reading the story it appears that the pregnancy was ordered to be ended, but both lives were to be saved if possible. That's why she had a C section.

So this presents another dilemma. If the "baby" is viable, should attempts be made to save it, even if it increases risks to the mother?

BTW, in this case the baby us not expected to survive and I have no idea if it did.

by nicko Fri Mar 01, 2019 4:34 pm

Wolfie, please give details of the "odious little clique"
I am sure we will all be interested. If you don't do so your an odious little creep ! I await your honest reply .

by Original Quill Fri Mar 01, 2019 4:37 pm

nicko wrote:Wolfie, please give details of the "odious little clique"
I am sure we will all be interested. If you don't do so your an odious little creep ! I await your honest reply .

Jezus...do you really want to talk about it? And then complain, I 'spose. Rolling Eyes

by 'Wolfie Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:58 pm

nicko wrote:
Wolfie, please give details of the "odious little clique"
I am sure we will all be interested. If you don't do so your an odious little creep ! I await your honest reply .

11-Year-Old Rape Victim Begged for an Abortion. She Was Forced to Give Birth Instead. 3489511464

You disgusting and supercilious old fool...

Threatening to call me a "creep" simply because I have the backbone to call out the more reprehensible slimebags among your forum chums..

Depending on whatever topic it is that 'smelly, Tommy or Deano wish to pontificate upon, within their anti-science, anti-climate or anti-humanitarian agendas, there are often a couple of supporters diving in from the same little gang --

Not only you yourself, but also Raggamuffin, gelico, vintage, all ready to support them -- as well as Tommy, smelly' amd Deano backing each other up regularly -- while there are always the same few same old old nasties on the side waiting to launch personal attacks against any of your opposition..

The regular defence of Tommy and smelly's lies and propaganda from you lot shows us who the real lowlife hatemongering scumbags are around here -- and that doesn't include me, or veya, or Quill, or Ben or eddie, or Cass or Sexy' or Jules or Andy..

by Maddog Sat Mar 02, 2019 12:00 am

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:
nicko wrote:
Wolfie, please give details of the "odious little clique"
I am sure we will all be interested. If you don't do so your an odious little creep ! I await your honest reply .

You disgusting and supercilious old fool...

Threatening to call me a "creep" simply because I have the backbone to call out the more reprehensible slimebags among your forum chums..

Depending on whatever topic it is that 'smelly, Tommy or Deano wish to pontificate upon, within their anti-science, anti-climate or anti-humanitarian agendas, there are often a couple of supporters diving in from the same little gang --

Not only you yourself, but also Raggamuffin, gelico, vintage, all ready to support them -- as well as Tommy, smelly' amd Deano backing each other up regularly -- while there are always the same few same old old nasties on the side waiting to launch personal attacks against any of your opposition..

The regular defence of Tommy and smelly's lies and propaganda from you lot shows us who the real lowlife hatemongering scumbags are around here -- and that doesn't include me, or veya, or Quill, or Ben or eddie, or Cass or Sexy' or Jules or Andy..

Ooooh!

There are teams here. Someone pick me, pick me!

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 12:03 am

Maddog wrote:
WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

You disgusting and supercilious old fool...

Threatening to call me a "creep" simply because I have the backbone to call out the more reprehensible slimebags among your forum chums..

Depending on whatever topic it is that 'smelly, Tommy or Deano wish to pontificate upon, within their anti-science, anti-climate or anti-humanitarian agendas, there are often a couple of supporters diving in from the same little gang --

Not only you yourself, but also Raggamuffin, gelico, vintage, all ready to support them -- as well as Tommy, smelly' amd Deano backing each other up regularly -- while there are always the same few same old old nasties on the side waiting to launch personal attacks against any of your opposition..

The regular defence of Tommy and smelly's lies and propaganda from you lot shows us who the real lowlife hatemongering scumbags are around here -- and that doesn't include me, or veya, or Quill, or Ben or eddie, or Cass or Sexy' or Jules or Andy..

Ooooh!

There are teams here. Someone pick me, pick me!

I thought you stood as independent?

Its actually what i admire about you mate

Laughing

If you think his views are poor or stupid, why do you continually fuel them?

You do realise you are as much to blame for continuning spats?

by Victorismyhero Sat Mar 02, 2019 12:06 am

two more posts from the forum eejit....that contain no relevence to the thread and are merely flame attacks on other posters.....

by 'Wolfie Sat Mar 02, 2019 12:06 am

Maddog wrote:
WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

You disgusting and supercilious old fool...

Threatening to call me a "creep" simply because I have the backbone to call out the more reprehensible slimebags among your forum chums..

Depending on whatever topic it is that 'smelly, Tommy or Deano wish to pontificate upon, within their anti-science, anti-climate or anti-humanitarian agendas, there are often a couple of supporters diving in from the same little gang --

Not only you yourself, but also Raggamuffin, gelico, vintage, all ready to support them -- as well as Tommy, smelly' amd Deano backing each other up regularly -- while there are always the same few same old old nasties on the side waiting to launch personal attacks against any of your opposition..

The regular defence of Tommy and smelly's lies and propaganda from you lot shows us who the real lowlife hatemongering scumbags are around here -- and that doesn't include me, or veya, or Quill, or Ben or eddie, or Cass or Sexy' or Jules or Andy..

Ooooh!

There are teams here. Someone pick me, pick me!

You and Thor are both capable of not taking sides, at times, even at times "playing one side against the other" depending on the subject..

While Eilzel would make a good referee..

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 12:10 am

I though would be interested in smelly's views which has has kept quite over here on this reality. Where women are being forced

If the view is to form a cesarean at over 20 weeks instead of abortion. Its an option to argue for, but argue for what quality of life for this fetus in such infancy?

If it survives which it only could with medical help. What life will they have in care?

So I have no issue in different options, but whre do these options lead to. If the Governement stipulates such a policy. Surely they should ensure that premature baby has a home to go to, if they do?

by Maddog Sat Mar 02, 2019 12:13 am

Thor wrote:
Maddog wrote:

Ooooh!

There are teams here. Someone pick me, pick me!

I thought you stood as independent?

Its actually what i admire about you mate

If you think his views are poor or stupid, why do you continually fuel them?

You do realise you are as much to blame for continuning spats?

I was just being a smart ass.

I think him constantly talking about other posters is stupid. His views are his views. That's his business.

by 'Wolfie Sat Mar 02, 2019 12:14 am

Lord Foul wrote:
two more posts from the forum eejit....that contain no relevence to the thread and are merely flame attacks on other posters.....

And like I said, there's always the same old nasties standing on the side, waiting to snipe at their opponents at any chance...

Victor himself often doesn't comment on the topic at hand -- but is always prepared to attack Andy, veya, Quill or my most humble self on these threads..

Never see him attacking smelly', Deano or Tommy over their more odious posts, though -- even though there's been plenty of opportunities go begging with threads that smelly' has put up over the last two weeks.

Shows the 'true measure' of both Victor and nicko here, that they only dive in with personal attacks against people calling out the scumbags among us..

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 12:16 am

Maddog wrote:
Thor wrote:

I thought you stood as independent?

Its actually what i admire about you mate

If you think his views are poor or stupid, why do you continually fuel them?

You do realise you are as much to blame for continuning spats?

I was just being a smart ass.

I think him constantly talking about other posters is stupid. His views are his views. That's his business.

He does have some very good views and points

The point is, you play into such spats by your reactions. As I do

When will we learn mate?

Wolf actually is very intelligent on biology, he gets very frustrated in what he sees as hate

He is mixed ethnically and mixed Aborigine. Thus can undertand why he gets utterly annoyed with hateful race claptrap or what it even feels like to be seen in a hateful way

Its never an excuse for his abuse, but maybe some of you need to spend a day in his shoes to understand how that is for him. To be judged on the colour of his skin and race

by Victorismyhero Sat Mar 02, 2019 12:27 am

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:
two more posts from the forum eejit....that contain no relevence to the thread and are merely flame attacks on other posters.....

And like I said, there's always the same old nasties standing on the side, waiting to snipe at their opponents at any chance...

Victor himself often doesn't comment on the topic at hand -- but is always prepared to attack Andy, veya, Quill or my most humble self on these threads..

Never see him attacking smelly', Deano or Tommy over their more odious posts, though -- even though there's been plenty of opportunities go begging with threads that smelly' has put up over the last two weeks.

thats because smelly etc generally make odious posts about the SUBJECT of the post......and you are free to counter that with replys on the SUBJECT of the post

whereas YOU/Andy /etc make odious posts about the POSTERS

and if you cant see the difference then you are not really as smart as you think you are.......

Shows the 'true measure' of both Victor and nicko here, that they only dive in with personal attacks against people calling out the scumbags among us..

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 12:34 am

Lord Foul wrote:
WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

And like I said, there's always the same old nasties standing on the side, waiting to snipe at their opponents at any chance...

Victor himself often doesn't comment on the topic at hand -- but is always prepared to attack Andy, veya, Quill or my most humble self on these threads..

Never see him attacking smelly', Deano or Tommy over their more odious posts, though -- even though there's been plenty of opportunities go begging with threads that smelly' has put up over the last two weeks.

thats because smelly etc generally make odious posts about the SUBJECT of the post......and you are free to counter that with replys on the SUBJECT of the post

whereas YOU/Andy /etc make odious posts about the POSTERS

and if you cant see the difference then you are not really as smart as you think you are.......

Shows the 'true measure' of both Victor and nicko here, that they only dive in with personal attacks against people calling out the scumbags among us..

Well do poor views lead to hate and violence?

Again i ask? Have you walked in the shoes of someone seen through distain for how they look or who they are?

You do understand people will feel anger at such poor views and lets face it when smelly posts he looks very much to antagonise mate

He knows this, as he is a provocator

So why is his provocations ignored?

We want fair debate here, but you simple cannot ignore how smelly himself looks to entice hateful reactions by his provocations

Yes people should not rise to this, but we all have a weakness in what makes us react

I dont agree with his abusful comments aimed at Smelly, but his view on smelly is now doubt true based on his beliefs around this

Lets face it, smelly would have been the first to force this 11 year old rape victim to go through with this

Can you not see how this would rightly anger people, based on smelly's mysognistic views?

You have to understand people when they look to provoke people, do so, knowing they will garner a reaction

Its because he understands they are esstinially human in their reactions

by Victorismyhero Sat Mar 02, 2019 12:36 am

wolfie...you surely will have noticed that I havnt criticised Quill for his, in your own words, "odious" and racist posts about eastern europeans...not because I happen to agree with him...which I dont (in fact I vehemently disagree with him, having had a sucession of superb polish ladies as helpers and carers for my father in his last year of life, who lived with my brother as "family, were treated as family and not only cared brilliantly for father but also cooked (superbly) for us lads when we were there and generally saw to it that things were as good as they could possibly be) but because I dont as you say often post much , ...I'm too busy stopping juvenile little loudmouths with a chip on their shoulder from reducing the forum to flame wars

by Victorismyhero Sat Mar 02, 2019 12:41 am

Thor wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:
WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

And like I said, there's always the same old nasties standing on the side, waiting to snipe at their opponents at any chance...

Victor himself often doesn't comment on the topic at hand -- but is always prepared to attack Andy, veya, Quill or my most humble self on these threads..

Never see him attacking smelly', Deano or Tommy over their more odious posts, though -- even though there's been plenty of opportunities go begging with threads that smelly' has put up over the last two weeks.

thats because smelly etc generally make odious posts about the SUBJECT of the post......and you are free to counter that with replys on the SUBJECT of the post

whereas YOU/Andy /etc make odious posts about the POSTERS

and if you cant see the difference then you are not really as smart as you think you are.......

Shows the 'true measure' of both Victor and nicko here, that they only dive in with personal attacks against people calling out the scumbags among us..

Well do poor views lead to hate and violence?

Again i ask? Have you walked in the shoes of someone seen through distain for how they look or who they are?

You do understand people will feel anger at such poor views and lets face it when smelly posts he looks very much to antagonise mate

He knows this, as he is a provocator

So why is his provocations ignored?

We want fair debate here, but you simple cannot ignore how smelly himself looks to entice hateful reactions by his provocations

Yes people should not rise to this, but we all have a weakness in what makes us react

I dont agree with his abusful comments aimed at Smelly, but his view on smelly is now doubt true based on his beliefs around this

Lets face it, smelly would have been the first to force this 11 year old rape victim to go through with this

Can you not see how this would rightly anger people, based on smelly's mysognistic views?

You have to understand people when they look to provoke people, do so, knowing they will garner a reaction

Its because he understands they are esstinially human in their reactions

yes? and I suppose you include Syl Ragga myself and many others in the same box as smelly (wolfie clearly does ) so that would be anyone who doesnt agree with wolfie....if it was just smelly i might....just....be able to understand it...but it isnt.....as I have repeatedly pointed out this persistant abusive rhetoric aimed at POSTERS rather than the content of the post is almost exclusively contained within one section of the forum corpus.....and it aint the R/W group.........

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 12:53 am

Lord Foul wrote:
Thor wrote:

Well do poor views lead to hate and violence?

Again i ask? Have you walked in the shoes of someone seen through distain for how they look or who they are?

You do understand people will feel anger at such poor views and lets face it when smelly posts he looks very much to antagonise mate

He knows this, as he is a provocator

So why is his provocations ignored?

We want fair debate here, but you simple cannot ignore how smelly himself looks to entice hateful reactions by his provocations

Yes people should not rise to this, but we all have a weakness in what makes us react

I dont agree with his abusful comments aimed at Smelly, but his view on smelly is now doubt true based on his beliefs around this

Lets face it, smelly would have been the first to force this 11 year old rape victim to go through with this

Can you not see how this would rightly anger people, based on smelly's mysognistic views?

You have to understand people when they look to provoke people, do so, knowing they will garner a reaction

Its because he understands they are esstinially human in their reactions

yes? and I suppose you include Syl Ragga myself and many others in the same box as smelly (wolfie clearly does ) so that would be anyone who doesnt agree with wolfie....if it was just smelly i might....just....be able to understand it...but it isnt.....as I have repeatedly pointed out this persistant abusive rhetoric aimed at POSTERS rather than the content of the post is almost exclusively contained within one section of the forum corpus.....and it aint the R/W group.........

Actually i do include rags and sly with a gang mentally and being the worst for being provocators
I mean how many times do they use mental health as a weapon against posters here?
Calling them senile, schizophrenics etc?

Is that okay to you?

They are happy to without him saying a word, make light of mental health to abuse him and I never see you say a word
In fact eddie picked this up the other day, when the pair of them and Hoaratio engaged on a full slagging off mode

So when are you going to show some consistancy on how they constantly get away with their abuse?

You never do, because you never judge this on abuse, but on a view to what you subjectively view as abuse to you

Frankly, nobody should be moderated on how they end up getting annoyed, but please spare me on abuse, when some constantly get away with this every day, simple because they are women. As they are always constantly given slack over their abuse

If abuse is wrong, then its wrong when anyone does so

by Victorismyhero Sat Mar 02, 2019 1:14 am

I have been observing long enough to know well enough that the girls can hand it back and in spadefuls..... but in 95% of the times thats is exactly what it is ...retaliatory I dont often see them wading in on a thread attacking wolfie with no provocation

and it aint just wolfie thats guilty of this kind of thing.......AND its not just this forum either...I am on a couple of others.....to do with my hobbies.....nothing to do with anyone on here and as far removed from the open subject matter of this forum as can be, yet in any political discussion it aint the R/W that is intolerantly abusive to other posters......

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 1:19 am

Lord Foul wrote:I have been observing long enough to know well enough that the girls can hand it back and in spadefuls..... but in 95% of the times thats is exactly what it is ...retaliatory I dont often see them wading in on a thread attacking wolfie with no provocation

and it aint just wolfie thats guilty of this kind of thing.......AND its not just this forum either...I am on a couple of others.....to do with my hobbies.....nothing to do with anyone on here and as far removed from the open subject matter of this forum as can be, yet in any political discussion it aint the R/W that is intolerantly abusive to other posters......

Like i said, its based on perceptions and the women are always given slack over their abuse

I read a thread the other day where neither I or wolf made any comments and the gang weighed in as they always do with mental healh abuse

So what you are saying is you do not actually wiegh up moderation on abuse, but on the number of times

How is anyone going to ever learn from that stupid mentality, when they as seen. Continually abuse and take advantage of the moderators?

Like i say perceptions and bias sway people, including moderators and even in my case it could in fact favour me

If abuse is wrong, it does not matter who does it most. When you aloow others to do so, when they do less. You make them believe they can always do so

That is what you fail to grasp

Frankly, it does not bother me that they do, those 3 women, are nothing more than a poor immature gang. That look to gang up on people when their views do not agree. I would rather, as i always do, take them to task

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 1:25 am

To prove what i am saying is true

Just see this thread Lord Foul

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t26428-answer-the-post-not-the-poster#502452

Again no views made by me or wolf and as seen women gain huge slack for when they abuse people

Hey ho

Again i dont want action, but spare me the piffle reasons that you offer

Night

by Victorismyhero Sat Mar 02, 2019 1:48 am

so one thread....what did I say ....95% of the time..........

you ALL get a LOT of slack from me I can assure you....I have mellowed considerably over the last couple of years......... Laughing

no...really...........

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 4:09 am

Lord Foul wrote:so one thread....what did I say ....95% of the time..........

you ALL get a LOT of slack from me I can assure you....I have mellowed considerably over the last couple of years......... no...really...........

Wow, so like I say its not based on abuse, but your perceptions around who is doing the abuse, in other words men and thus not women

That was very easy to prove

by SEXY MAMA Sat Mar 02, 2019 4:38 am

Poor child!

Being raped and then giving birth at that age!

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 5:43 am

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

At least the smelly-bum' trollster will be proud that some equally backward misogynists have yet again fullfilled his perverted anti-humanitarian desires...

And as with smelly' and his similarly-depraved supporters, their faux-religious-backed mission ends with the baby's birth..

True to form, neither the Argentine authorities nor smelly's odious little clique will give even the slightest damn about the welfare of either mother or child.

IF there is a "hell" in smelly's deranged parallel universe, then smelly' and all his like-minded "pro-lifers"/anti-abortionists can rest assured that they already have their seats "down there" reserved..

That's quite a rant, even for you.

I do so enjoy getting undsr your skin, though you should know that when you lose your shit like this it only encourages me.

lol!

by nicko Sat Mar 02, 2019 6:16 am

So Wolfie is part Aborigine ? Then I Suggest he takes some time out and indulges in a little "Dreamtime" , He might then stop being an "odious little hateful creep" and get rid of the massive chip on his shoulder. He obvious has feelings of inferiority !

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 6:49 am

Wolfie you seem somewhat agitated, and I'm at a loss as to why, perhaps you can clear it up for me??

You seem pretty relaxed by the fact that she was raped but completely enraged by her not being allowed to abort it.

Its like your utterly furious at being denied the opportunity to punch the air in victory shouting "another aborted baby bites the dust, whoop whoop"

Would it bother you less if she was allowed to abort it???

You know?? Put a positive spin on it

"it sucks you were raped but at least now you get to experience true female empowerment by aborting the baby, gotta look for that silver lining"

Is that more to your liking???

Although I can't imagine that didge would post an article which read "girl raped and ALLOWED abortion",certainly the main thrust of this article seems to be less about the rape and more about the denial of abortion.

What exactly is it that your angry about??

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 7:06 am

Thor wrote:I though would be interested in smelly's views which has has kept quite over here on this reality. Where women are being forced

If the view is to form a cesarean at over 20 weeks instead of abortion. Its an option to argue for, but argue for what quality of life for this fetus in such infancy?

If it survives which it only could with medical help. What life will they have in care?

So I have no issue in different options, but whre do these options lead to. If the Governement stipulates such a policy. Surely they should ensure that premature baby has a home to go to, if they do?

It is always still though down to the woman carrying to decide and not any man, governement or other woman to force her against her will

by Raggamuffin Sat Mar 02, 2019 8:46 am

Thor wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:

yes? and I suppose you include Syl Ragga myself and many others in the same box as smelly (wolfie clearly does ) so that would be anyone who doesnt agree with wolfie....if it was just smelly i might....just....be able to understand it...but it isnt.....as I have repeatedly pointed out this persistant abusive rhetoric aimed at POSTERS rather than the content of the post is almost exclusively contained within one section of the forum corpus.....and it aint the R/W group.........

Actually i do include rags and sly with a gang mentally and being the worst for being provocators
I mean how many times do they use mental health as a weapon against posters here?
Calling them senile, schizophrenics etc?

Is that okay to you?

They are happy to without him saying a word, make light of mental health to abuse him and I never see you say a word
In fact eddie picked this up the other day, when the pair of them and Hoaratio engaged on a full slagging off mode

So when are you going to show some consistancy on how they constantly get away with their abuse?

You never do, because you never judge this on abuse, but on a view to what you subjectively view as abuse to you

Frankly, nobody should be moderated on how they end up getting annoyed, but please spare me on abuse, when some constantly get away with this every day, simple because they are women. As they are always constantly given slack over their abuse

If abuse is wrong, then its wrong when anyone does so

I never call anyone schizophrenic, unless they are actually schizophrenic. I dislike the way the word is misused actually - people use it to mean split personality, and that's simply not right. I don't think I've called anyone senile either.

Wolfboy dragged me into this thread even though I hadn't even commented.

by Raggamuffin Sat Mar 02, 2019 8:48 am

nicko wrote:So Wolfie is part Aborigine ? Then I Suggest he takes some time out and indulges in a little "Dreamtime" , He might then stop being an "odious little hateful creep" and get rid of the massive chip on his shoulder. He obvious has feelings of inferiority !

I think he said his great grandfather was Aborigine or something, but he thinks of himself as white. In any case, I don't see why being "part Aborigine" means that someone has a green light to abuse others with impunity.

by nicko Sat Mar 02, 2019 9:10 am

Agreed !

by Raggamuffin Sat Mar 02, 2019 9:44 am

Maddog wrote:This appears to be a government incompetence problem. It seems like the procedure is available, but the system is difficult for people to navigate. Especially those without an education or the ability to read and write.

After reading the story it appears that the pregnancy was ordered to be ended, but both lives were to be saved if possible. That's why she had a C section.

So this presents another dilemma. If the "baby" is viable, should attempts be made to save it, even if it increases risks to the mother?

BTW, in this case the baby us not expected to survive and I have no idea if it did.

From what I've read, there was a problem with obtaining consent from her guardian. She lived with her grandmother so her mother was not deemed suitable to give consent, but then the grandmother lost guardianship because her partner was accused of raping the child, so there were some delays there. Also, some doctors refused to perform the abortion, which they're perfectly entited to do.

She clearly wasn't actually refused an abortion per se, but by the time it was sorted it was too dangerous to do one, hence the c-section. The c-section was pretty much an abortion anyway as the baby is unlikely to survive. If not for the delays, the abortion would have taken place at 19 or 20 weeks, which is pretty late IMO.

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 1:57 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
nicko wrote:So Wolfie is part Aborigine ? Then I Suggest he takes some time out and indulges in a little "Dreamtime" , He might then stop being an "odious little hateful creep" and get rid of the massive chip on his shoulder. He obvious has feelings of inferiority !

I think he said his great grandfather was Aborigine or something, but he thinks of himself as white. In any case, I don't see why being "part Aborigine" means that someone has a green light to abuse others with impunity.

So that's why is he so filled with anger

White guilt, his native side is at war with his colonial side.

Ahhhhhhhhhh poor little wolfie

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 1:59 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

I think he said his great grandfather was Aborigine or something, but he thinks of himself as white. In any case, I don't see why being "part Aborigine" means that someone has a green light to abuse others with impunity.

So that's why is he so filled with anger

White guilt, his native side is at war with his colonial side.

Ahhhhhhhhhh poor little wolfie

He does not have any white guilt

You are again using your dreams and not any rationality

by Maddog Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:11 pm

SEXY MAMA wrote:Poor child!

Being raped and then giving birth at that age!

On topic post.

Not allowed. Ban her.

by Maddog Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:14 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Maddog wrote:This appears to be a government incompetence problem. It seems like the procedure is available, but the system is difficult for people to navigate. Especially those without an education or the ability to read and write.

After reading the story it appears that the pregnancy was ordered to be ended, but both lives were to be saved if possible. That's why she had a C section.

So this presents another dilemma. If the "baby" is viable, should attempts be made to save it, even if it increases risks to the mother?

BTW, in this case the baby us not expected to survive and I have no idea if it did.

From what I've read, there was a problem with obtaining consent from her guardian. She lived with her grandmother so her mother was not deemed suitable to give consent, but then the grandmother lost guardianship because her partner was accused of raping the child, so there were some delays there. Also, some doctors refused to perform the abortion, which they're perfectly entited to do.

She clearly wasn't actually refused an abortion per se, but by the time it was sorted it was too dangerous to do one, hence the c-section. The c-section was pretty much an abortion anyway as the baby is unlikely to survive. If not for the delays, the abortion would have taken place at 19 or 20 weeks, which is pretty late IMO.

Another on topic post.

This nonsense needs to cease.

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:22 pm

Rags is ignoring the evidence

The state clearly did not take on the many requests and already the country has poor laws on this.

Hence why its of no surpise something like this happenes in a dominantly Catholic country

As again we see poor maths by Rags

22-24 weeks is variance of the limit in most countries and this was performed at 23 weeks

https://www.government.nl/topics/abortion/question-and-answer/what-is-the-time-limit-for-having-an-abortion

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/abortion/

A month before, would have placed this very much so within the limit at 19 weeks

People need to read the story through

Daily Beast wrote:
Andhes Derechos Humanos stepped in earlier this month after hearing about the case in the local media. Along with human rights group Cladem, they asked a judge to compel the state to perform the abortion. Forcing a girl to carry a baby to term in these conditions, they wrote, “is a form of torture and degrading treatment that seriously affects the girl's human rights.”

On Tuesday, under the judge’s orders, the Tucumán health system announced it would end the pregnancy. Even then, however, officials implored the hospital director to “continue with the procedures necessary to attempt to save both lives”—a common refrain among anti-abortion campaigners in the country. A communications director for the Tucumán Supreme Court later had to confirm that the judge had not, in fact, ordered doctors to save both lives.

The procedure itself proved full of hurdles. To start, the state was forced to call in two private doctors to perform it, after every doctor in the hospital declared themselves an objector. Then, the doctors discovered that the girl’s body could not support a surgical abortion. They performed a cesarean section instead, leaving the 11-year-old with a baby weighing just over one pound. The infant is not expected to survive.

In follow-up interviews, Dr. Cecilia Ousset quickly dispensed with the secretary of health's version of events, telling Radio Nacional Tucumán the girl did not weigh nearly 50 kilos. Seeing her for the first time in the hospital, Ousset said, she was shocked by how small the girl looked.

"The child played with dolls,” she said. “When I saw her my legs trembled, it was like seeing my youngest daughter. The little girl did not fully understand what was going to happen.”

The incident bore striking resemblance to a story from the month before, when a 12-year-old girl in Jujuy provence requested an abortion after allegedly being raped by a 60-year-old man. The government denied her request, citing her advanced gestation, and forced her to give birth to a 24-week-old baby via c-section on Jan. 18. The baby died four days later.

by Maddog Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:29 pm

Maddog wrote:
SEXY MAMA wrote:Poor child!

Being raped and then giving birth at that age!
On topic post.

Not allowed. Ban her.

Oh, and while appreciate the on topic nature of the post, the young lady didnt really give birth. At least not in a conventional manner. The pregnancy was ordered to be terminated via a C section designed to attempt to save the baby at the same time.

It brings up a moral dilemma that we will likely soon be dealing with. We will have the technology to remove a fetus and allow it to continue developing outside of the womb.

Will the pro choice crowd support these fetus being allowed to survive? Will the pro life crowd raise and support these children?

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:30 pm

Maddog wrote:
Maddog wrote:
On topic post.

Not allowed. Ban her.
Oh, and while appreciate the on topic nature of the post, the young lady didnt really give birth. At least not in a conventional manner. The pregnancy was ordered to be terminated via a C section designed to attempt to save the baby at the same time.

It brings up a moral dilemma that we will likely soon be dealing with. We will have the technology to remove a fetus and allow it to continue developing outside of the womb.

Will the pro choice crowd support these fetus being allowed to survive? Will the pro life crowd raise and support these children?

Interesting, as i already stated this earlier in the thread

If the view is to form a cesarean at over 20 weeks instead of abortion. Its an option to argue for, but argue for what quality of life for this fetus in such infancy?

If it survives which it only could with medical help. What life will they have in care?

So I have no issue in different options, but where do these options lead to. If the Governement stipulates such a policy. Surely they should ensure that premature baby has a home to go to, if they do survive? Also what cost implications will this have on the number of cases?

It is always still though down to the woman carrying to decide and not any man, governement or other woman to force her against her will

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:35 pm

Maddog wrote:
Maddog wrote:
On topic post.

Not allowed. Ban her.
Oh, and while appreciate the on topic nature of the post, the young lady didnt really give birth. At least not in a conventional manner. The pregnancy was ordered to be terminated via a C section designed to attempt to save the baby at the same time.

It brings up a moral dilemma that we will likely soon be dealing with. We will have the technology to remove a fetus and allow it to continue developing outside of the womb.

Will the pro choice crowd support these fetus being allowed to survive? Will the pro life crowd raise and support these children?

No they won't

They have already openly declared their desire to terminate without a time limit

The Democrats attempted to pass a bill that would allow termination at the point where the mother is in labour and dilatating

The gov of Virginia commented on the bill clarifying that termination could be carried out on the infant AFTER it had been born.

The pro choice brigade are not pro choice they are pro abortion

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:38 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:
Maddog wrote:
Oh, and while appreciate the on topic nature of the post, the young lady didnt really give birth. At least not in a conventional manner. The pregnancy was ordered to be terminated via a C section designed to attempt to save the baby at the same time.

It brings up a moral dilemma that we will likely soon be dealing with. We will have the technology to remove a fetus and allow it to continue developing outside of the womb.

Will the pro choice crowd support these fetus being allowed to survive? Will the pro life crowd raise and support these children?

No they won't

They have already openly declared their desire to terminate without a time limit

The Democrats attempted to pass a bill that would allow termination at the point where the mother is in labour and dilatating

The gov of Virginia commented on the bill clarifying that termination could be carried out on the infant AFTER it had been born.

The pro choice brigade are not pro choice they are pro abortion

So you are saying those Pro life wont help?

Did you actually read what Maddog said, seriously?

by Maddog Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:46 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:
Maddog wrote:
Oh, and while appreciate the on topic nature of the post, the young lady didnt really give birth. At least not in a conventional manner. The pregnancy was ordered to be terminated via a C section designed to attempt to save the baby at the same time.

It brings up a moral dilemma that we will likely soon be dealing with. We will have the technology to remove a fetus and allow it to continue developing outside of the womb.

Will the pro choice crowd support these fetus being allowed to survive? Will the pro life crowd raise and support these children?

No they won't

They have already openly declared their desire to terminate without a time limit

The Democrats attempted to pass a bill that would allow termination at the point where the mother is in labour and dilatating

The gov of Virginia commented on the bill clarifying that termination could be carried out on the infant AFTER it had been born.

The pro choice brigade are not pro choice they are pro abortion

I tend to think you are right about the pro choice crowd. They are not going to like the idea of a fetus maturing into a viable human. It's why carrying a child to term and giving it up for adoption is not very popular with them.

Not sure how the pro life crowd would act. We know that prior to Roe v Wade, we seemed to do a pretty good job of adopting these children. Me and my sisters are examples. But it's a different time now. How many people will adopt 3 kids now? 11-Year-Old Rape Victim Begged for an Abortion. She Was Forced to Give Birth Instead. 2190311264

11-Year-Old Rape Victim Begged for an Abortion. She Was Forced to Give Birth Instead. 2190311264

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 3:04 pm

Maddog wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:

No they won't

They have already openly declared their desire to terminate without a time limit

The Democrats attempted to pass a bill that would allow termination at the point where the mother is in labour and dilatating

The gov of Virginia commented on the bill clarifying that termination could be carried out on the infant AFTER it had been born.

The pro choice brigade are not pro choice they are pro abortion
I tend to think you are right about the pro choice crowd. They are not going to like the idea of a fetus maturing into a viable human. It's why carrying a child to term and giving it up for adoption is not very popular with them.
:

Well there is a valid reason as to why, being the ones carrying have the choice and nobody else should decide for them

I dont think it has anything to maturing and you have no idea how many would take this option, if it was offered at the 20 week state of pregnancy. At best you are speculating

I think in fact some would take this option, but what are the survival chances at this early state of pregnancy?

Not only that, what is the cost implication going to be and who is going to pay for this?

You do realise that there is people that are pro choice but also think abortion is unethical?

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 3:21 pm

Maddog wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:

No they won't

They have already openly declared their desire to terminate without a time limit

The Democrats attempted to pass a bill that would allow termination at the point where the mother is in labour and dilatating

The gov of Virginia commented on the bill clarifying that termination could be carried out on the infant AFTER it had been born.

The pro choice brigade are not pro choice they are pro abortion
I tend to think you are right about the pro choice crowd. They are not going to like the idea of a fetus maturing into a viable human. It's why carrying a child to term and giving it up for adoption is not very popular with them.

Not sure how the pro life crowd would act. We know that prior to Roe v Wade, we seemed to do a pretty good job of adopting these children. Me and my sisters are examples. But it's a different time now. How many people will adopt 3 kids now?

The pro abortion lot would lobby govt and riot in the streets to prevent any new legislation that banned abortion in the event that medical technology was developed to allow the child to be transferred to some kind of artifical womb or indeed the womb of another woman who potentially couldn't fall pregnant naturally, and then allowed to live to term.

Its never been about choice really, it's only ever been about control. Women have a pathological requirement to be in control which is why they are getting super angry at male contraceptives and sexbots, and I predict civil war if the artificial womb is ever invented because it strip women of their control over death and over life and make women utterly redundant.

Ironically the dream preached by feminists of female empowerment by being freed from biological shackles of carrying the child would be realised.............. And women would fucking hate it.

No, the pro abortion lot would never tolerate where they didn't have the final say over abortion, their ideology is based on 4 words "her body her choice" and no change to that status quo will ever be allowed

by Raggamuffin Sat Mar 02, 2019 3:25 pm

Maddog wrote:
Maddog wrote:
On topic post.

Not allowed. Ban her.
Oh, and while appreciate the on topic nature of the post, the young lady didnt really give birth. At least not in a conventional manner. The pregnancy was ordered to be terminated via a C section designed to attempt to save the baby at the same time.

It brings up a moral dilemma that we will likely soon be dealing with. We will have the technology to remove a fetus and allow it to continue developing outside of the womb.

Will the pro choice crowd support these fetus being allowed to survive? Will the pro life crowd raise and support these children?

Exactly. She got her abortion, albeit in an unusual way. At the time, there was no sense in just killing the baby for the sake of it, so they tried to save it.

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 3:28 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:

The pro abortion lot would lobby govt and riot in the streets to prevent any new legislation that banned abortion in the event that medical technology was developed to allow the child to be transferred to some kind of artifical womb or indeed the womb of another woman who potentially couldn't fall pregnant naturally, and then allowed to live to term.
Thor wrote:Well considering a bortion never would be banned in the first place with new medical options. It would mean there is simple new options. Even if it was banned, you again are making assumtpions people would not welcome a better alternative. Though its hard to see how this is even a better alternative when the fetus is unlikely to survive using cesarian at 20 weeks

Its never been about choice really, it's only ever been about control. Women have a pathological requirement to be in control which is why they are getting super angry at male contraceptives and sexbots, and I predict civil war if the artificial womb is ever invented because it strip women of their control over death and over life and make women utterly redundant.
Thor wrote:Well its really odd, that you use control, when you are attempting to control the lives of others. You then interject some really unscientifc nonsense and quite blatant sexist babble. Claiming women have a pathological requirement to be in control. Where for most of human history, this has rarely even happened. So your predictions based on alternatives are more based on your extreme ideological mysognoistic views on por choice women

Ironically the dream preached by feminists of female empowerment by being freed from biological shackles of carrying the child would be realised.............. And women would fucking hate it.
Thor wrote:Again is this based on their views, or actually yours?
You actually have no idea, but would spread the most ridiculous and outrageous claims, that have no bearing as nobody can predict how women would react to this

No, the pro abortion lot would never tolerate where they didn't have the final say over abortion, their ideology is based on 4 words "her body her choice" and no change to that status quo will ever be allowed

What gets me, is how you have continued to ignore Madoogs original point on using this alternative option with pro lifers taking up the mantle to then care for a cesarian birth at 20 weeks. In fact you have avoided this main point throughout. To simple go on one of your hateful rants against women

by Raggamuffin Sat Mar 02, 2019 3:31 pm

Thor wrote:Rags is ignoring the evidence

The state clearly did not take on the many requests and already the country has poor laws on this.

Hence why its of no surpise something like this happenes in a dominantly Catholic country

As again we see poor maths by Rags

22-24 weeks is variance of the limit in most countries and this was performed at 23 weeks

https://www.government.nl/topics/abortion/question-and-answer/what-is-the-time-limit-for-having-an-abortion

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/abortion/

A month before, would have placed this very much so within the limit at 19 weeks

People need to read the story through
Daily Beast wrote:
Andhes Derechos Humanos stepped in earlier this month after hearing about the case in the local media. Along with human rights group Cladem, they asked a judge to compel the state to perform the abortion. Forcing a girl to carry a baby to term in these conditions, they wrote, “is a form of torture and degrading treatment that seriously affects the girl's human rights.”

On Tuesday, under the judge’s orders, the Tucumán health system announced it would end the pregnancy. Even then, however, officials implored the hospital director to “continue with the procedures necessary to attempt to save both lives”—a common refrain among anti-abortion campaigners in the country. A communications director for the Tucumán Supreme Court later had to confirm that the judge had not, in fact, ordered doctors to save both lives.

The procedure itself proved full of hurdles. To start, the state was forced to call in two private doctors to perform it, after every doctor in the hospital declared themselves an objector. Then, the doctors discovered that the girl’s body could not support a surgical abortion. They performed a cesarean section instead, leaving the 11-year-old with a baby weighing just over one pound. The infant is not expected to survive.

In follow-up interviews, Dr. Cecilia Ousset quickly dispensed with the secretary of health's version of events, telling Radio Nacional Tucumán the girl did not weigh nearly 50 kilos. Seeing her for the first time in the hospital, Ousset said, she was shocked by how small the girl looked.

"The child played with dolls,” she said. “When I saw her my legs trembled, it was like seeing my youngest daughter. The little girl did not fully understand what was going to happen.”

The incident bore striking resemblance to a story from the month before, when a 12-year-old girl in Jujuy provence requested an abortion after allegedly being raped by a 60-year-old man. The government denied her request, citing her advanced gestation, and forced her to give birth to a 24-week-old baby via c-section on Jan. 18. The baby died four days later.

There's nothing wrong with my maths. My post was clearly stating my opinion - I'm not interested in your version of the law.

by Sponsored content