As Ohio restricts abortions, 10-year-old girl travels to Indiana for procedure

Link (Archive - http://archive.today/ravJs)

On Monday three days after the Supreme Court issued its groundbreaking decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, Dr. Caitlin Bernard, an Indianapolis obstetrician-gynecologist, took a call from a colleague, a child abuse doctor in Ohio.

Hours after the Supreme Court action, the Buckeye state had outlawed any abortion 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?

Indiana lawmakers are poised to further restrict or ban abortion in mere weeks. The Indiana General Assembly will convene in a special session July 25 when it will discuss restrictio ns to abortion policy along with inflation relief.


But for now, the procedure still is legal in Indiana. And so the girl soon was on her way to Indiana to Bernard's care.

Indiana abortion laws unchanged, but effect still felt across state​

While Indiana law did not change last week when the Supreme Court issued its groundbreaking Dobbs decision, abortion providers here have felt an effect, experiencing a dramatic increase in the number of patients coming to their clinics from neighboring states with more restrictive policies.


Since Friday, the abortion clinics where Dr. Katie McHugh, an independent obstetrician-gynecologists works have seen “an insane amount of requests” from pregnant people in Kentucky and Ohio, where it is far more difficult to get an abortion.
A ban on abortions after six weeks took effect on last week in Ohio. Last Friday the two abortion providers in Kentucky shut their doors after that state’s trigger law banning abortions went into effect.
Indiana soon could have similar restrictions.
That pains doctors like Bernard.
“It’s hard to imagine that in just a few short weeks we will have no ability to provide that care,” Bernard said.

For now, Indiana abortion providers have been fielding more calls from neighboring states. Typically about five to eight patients a day might hail from out of state, said McHugh, who works at multiple clinics in central and southern Indiana. Now, the clinics are seeing about 20 such patients a day.

Kentucky patients have been coming to Indiana in higher numbers since earlier this spring when more restrictive laws took effect there, McHugh said.

Indianapolis abortion clinics seeing surge in patients from Ohio, Kentucky​

A similar dynamic is at play at Women’s Med, a medical center that performs abortions in Indianapolis that has a sister center in Dayton, Ohio. In the past week, they have doubled the number of patients they treat for a complete procedure, accepting many referrals from their Ohio counterpart.

More than 100 patients in Dayton had to be scheduled at the Indianapolis facility, a representative for Women’s Med, wrote in an email to IndyStar.

Women and pregnant people are “crying, distraught, desperate, thankful and appreciative,” the representative wrote.

The two centers are working together to route patients to Indianapolis for a termination after a pre-op appointment in Dayton. In recent months, they have also had people from southern states, like Texas, come north for a procedure.

Many patients, particularly from Ohio and Kentucky, are seeking care through Women’s Med while also making multiple appointments in other states so if one state closes down, they will still have some options, the representative wrote.

The center is advising pregnant people with a positive pregnancy test to book an appointment even though prior to the Supreme Court ruling they asked people to wait until their six-week mark to do so.

For years people have traversed state lines for abortions, particularly if a clinic across the border is closer to their home than the nearest in-state facility.

In 2021, 465, or about 5.5% of the more than 8,400 abortions performed, were done on out-of-state residents, according to the Indiana Department of Health's most recent terminated pregnancy report. More than half, 264, lived in Kentucky and 40 in Ohio.

Midwestern residents can also travel to Illinois, where abortion is likely to remain legal even in the wake of the recent Supreme Court ruling but for many Indiana is closer and until the lawmakers pass any measure to the contrary, abortion will be legal here.

Still, it remains murky what the future holds.

Thursday a lower court ruled that abortions could resume, at least for now, in Kentucky. On Wednesday abortion clinics in Ohio filed suit, saying that state’s new ban was unconstitutional.

In Indiana lawmakers have declined to provide specifics of what measures any abortion legislation considered here might contain.

For now, then, abortion providers are doing their best to accommodate all Hoosier patients as well those from neighboring states.

“We are doing the best we can to increase availability and access as long as we can, knowing that this will be a temporary time frame that we can offer that assistance,” McHugh said.

 

[mold]

Well it will be an immediate when she's in labor... so why not do it now?

I'm 99% you're being a disingenuous fuckwit. Like most left leaning 21/22 users seem to be.

99% you're looking at black letter law and refusing to read what the words say on the page

 

[Android raptor]

Conspiracy theorists are so ignorants.
Unfortunately sexual abuse of minor isn't a rare thing. It's not "convenient that the almost perfect exemple yada Yada" this type of horrible stuff happens all. the. time.
In each class of cute little kids you see passing by there's several victims.
1 in 5 girls are victims of sexual abuse during childhood and 1 in 20 boys. The statistic on straight-up rape is way lower (less that 2%), but enough that I can guarantee you that she isn't alone: This one girl is making the news anonymously but at this very moment in this country others like her are also looking to abort their rapist's offspring.

And those statistics are just based on what's reported to authorities. CSA is one of those things where all experts agree happens even more than what's reported.

The average age of menarche is like 12, and lots of girls especially these days get their first periods even younger than that. CSA can also cause kids to start physical puberty earlier than they would have otherwise.

A pregnant 10 year old rape victim having to go to another state to get a probably life-saving abortion isn't fake, and I doubt this is even the only story like this happening RN. These are just prolifers' islamic-ass chickens coming home to roost.

Every study I've seen claiming as high a rate as 1 in 5 has included offenses as basic as "stranger on bus stared uncomfortably long" or "received compliment in public" as sexual abuse. Care to back your numbers up?

Adults sexually harassing children, even if it's just catcalling, is fucked and anyone who does it needs to immediately minecraft.

 

[TenMilesWide]

Adults sexually harassing children, even if it's just catcalling, is fucked and anyone who does it needs to immediately minecraft.

Wouldn't even disagree with that, but when you include catcalling in your study on sexual abuse and don't bother separating it out from violent gangrape in the statistics, your numbers become worthless. People see you're crying wolf and will not agree to your proposed solutions, even if they were sensible.

 

[Android raptor]

Wouldn't even disagree with that, but when you include catcalling in your study on sexual abuse and don't bother separating it out from violent gangrape in the statistics, your numbers become worthless. People see you're crying wolf and will not agree to your proposed solutions, even if they were sensible.

Is that specifically a study on child sex abuse, or is it being confused with something a bit different?

Child sex abuse, as in where the child was physically touched in some way, is generally agreed as being underreported.

 

[The Wicked Mitch]

Adults sexually harassing children, even if it's just catcalling, is fucked and anyone who does it needs to immediately minecraft.

Absolutely, but im sure everyone who is not insane would agree that there are degrees of severity that are important to distinguish.

1 in 5 girls being gangraped before they turn 18 is an entirely different issue from 1 in 5 girls being told they have a nice ass at 17.5 years old.

 

[TenMilesWide]

Is that specifically a study on child sex abuse, or is it being confused with something a bit different?

Child sex abuse, as in where the child was physically touched in some way, is generally agreed as being underreported.

I'm talking about sex abuse studies in general, the ones we get the big "1 in 6/ 1 in 5/ 1 in 4 women will experience sexual abuse in their lifetime" statistics from. Said studies frequently inflate their final tally by asking questions like "has a man ever asked for your phone number out in the street?" and counting affirmative responses as instances of sexual abuse even when the respondent hasn't reported it as such. If we're counting "got catcalled, took it as a compliment, moved on with my day" in the same category as "raped by kkk megachurch family, pregnant at 8" I can only assume it's because they want to misguide me into thinking it's all the latter for rhetorical purposes.

If you are unironically going to tell me that that 1 in 5 sarcastic sockpuppet was talking about is mostly rape and actually that's underselling the real figure, I'm going to have to step back and ask why you and others like you aren't already hanging the people responsible from lampposts because anything less would be unbelievable cowardice.

 

[Male Idiot]

What the hell are they putting in your food that a 10 year old can get pregnant, even?

Usually when I was in school it started around 13-14*, for whites. Gypsies get pregnant earlier but they mature faster due to roach darkie genes. Perhaps it was a niglet getting some hood love?**


* Usually a girl would find blood on her seat, and be escorted to the nurse's office. Usually in 8th grade.

** A gypsy girl will remain a virgin while she can hide from her father and is stronger than her brother.

 

[Trugrade]

Not gonna sped too hard politically, but yeah abortion is wrong. However, there are these extreme cases where we need to leave a “slight” bit of slack on the law. Was she impregnated by rape? Incest? Some fucking pedo? As sad as that case may be, I would ONLY allow exceptions in these situations if criminal charges are pending or an active police investigation is underway.

No just “Hey, some guy raped me. It’s okay I won’t file charges. I’ll just murder this little mistake and go about my way.”

 

[TheBigZee]

I know your baiting people to respond, but I'm going to reply anyway to get the last word in and for lols.


Nigga, you can get a pregnancy diagnosis in 3 minutes.
View attachment 3458664

The diagnosis has to qualify for an abortion under the exceptions in the law. The girl would have to have something wrong with her you can diagnose. So she'd have to have type 1 diabetes, or multiple sclerosis. Or something in the vague "not limited to". Being 10 isn't a medical diagnosis. The letter of the law requires that.

2. If you seriously believe that most doctors wouldn't look at a 56 inch tall 70 lb 10 year old girl that is going through pregnancy with very deep concern at the very least, you are ether mentally stunted or come from the heavily polluted end of an impoverished third world nation. Or both.

Of course every doctor is going to have a deep concern. They could write a thesis about all the bad things that could happen to the girl. It doesn't change that there is the strict requirement that something already be wrong. That part of the law was deliberate - you could use the same hypothetical to justify any abortion.

Edit: I edited in the not limited to, but it has to be similarly severe as those things. So like epilepsy or adrenal insufficiency or some shit. It has to be there, it can't hypothetically happen.

I apologize for the double post.

Here is the exception:

(B) Division (A) of this section does not apply to a physician who performs a medical procedure that, in the physician's reasonable medical judgment, is designed or intended to prevent the death of the pregnant woman or to prevent a serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman.

That sounds good and it sounds like it should allow the doctors to perform the abortion. Until you get to the definitions:

(12) "Serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function" has the same meaning as in section 2919.16 of the Revised Code.

Ok, so what are those definitions

"Medical emergency" means a condition that in the physician's good faith medical judgment, based upon the facts known to the physician at that time, so complicates the woman's pregnancy as to necessitate the immediate performance or inducement of an abortion in order to prevent the death of the pregnant woman or to avoid a serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman that delay in the performance or inducement of the abortion would create.

Life of the mother requires an immediate life threatening condition that can brook no delay. The girl didn't qualify under this exception.

"Serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function" means any medically diagnosed condition that so complicates the pregnancy of the woman as to directly or indirectly cause the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function. A medically diagnosed condition that constitutes a "serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function" includes pre-eclampsia, inevitable abortion, and premature rupture of the membranes, may include, but is not limited to, diabetes and multiple sclerosis, and does not include a condition related to the woman's mental health.

In order to comply with the law, they have to make a medical diagnosis that complicates the pregnancy. What is a medical diagnosis:

Medical diagnosis (abbreviated Dx,[1] Dx, or Ds) is the process of determining which disease or condition explains a person's symptoms and signs. It is most often referred to as diagnosis with the medical context being implicit. The information required for diagnosis is typically collected from a history and physical examination of the person seeking medical care. Often, one or more diagnostic procedures, such as medical tests, are also done during the process. Sometimes posthumous diagnosis is considered a kind of medical diagnosis.

Being 10 isn't a diagnosis. It's a factor that complicates the pregnancy. But it isn't a diagnosis. Being 10 doesn't qualify. If they can't find a medical diagnosis to apply *right now* the girl has to continue to carry the pregnancy until they make a diagnosis. That is going to be terrible for her mental health, but the statute gives a blanket restriction.

This situation isn't supposed to be covered under the medical allowances. It's covered in other states with a rape/incest exclusion or age of the mother.

Something is illegal whether you're prosecuted or not. In medicine illegal conduct has ramifications beyond being prosecuted.

 

[St.Davis]

To pro-life posters here:

I understand your viewpoints on preserving life, even in the womb. But I want to ask: why remain steadfast on that stance for a child being raped to preserve a life that shouldn't had been created under those conditions?

The argument would be that the baby isnt at fault, and so functionally there's no special reason it should be killed. It's somewhat a "sins of the father" situation.
The two options are forcing a child to carry a life to term (Which is very likely to cause further emotional trauma), or alternatively ending that life through abortion (Which is also likely to cause further trauma). Neither of these options are good, and for many people this is effectively Sophie's Choice. I really don't know where to stand on this issue (And on abortion in general), but I am definitely in agreement with the people advocating for millstones.

"A life that shouldn't had been created under those conditions" is such a strange thing to say, incidentally. It's the same life regardless of when/how it is created.

They didn't wait six weeks. Many, if not most women first learn that they're pregnant when they're six to eight weeks along. Gestational age is measured by the first day of the last period. At six weeks pregnant, technically the embryo is only four weeks old at that point.

Well, in this case they arguably DID wait six weeks, given that this is evidently a child being raped. If the rape was known of prior to the stated six weeks, then tests ought to have been done immediately.
Unless it took precisely six weeks to be found out, which is a rather "convenient" timeframe.

 

[Android raptor]

Not gonna sped too hard politically, but yeah abortion is wrong. However, there are these extreme cases where we need to leave a “slight” bit of slack on the law. Was she impregnated by rape? Incest? Some fucking pedo? As sad as that case may be, I would ONLY allow exceptions in these situations if criminal charges are pending or an active police investigation is underway.

No just “Hey, some guy raped me. It’s okay I won’t file charges. I’ll just murder this little mistake and go about my way.”

Why would you need police investigation to allow a pregnant 10 year old to get an abortion? The simple fact that a 10 year old is pregnant means rape happened. 10 year olds can't consent to sex. Also the police investigation likely started the second it was discovered the 10 year old was pregnant, if not sooner.

Think about it this way, would y'all want to be forced to gestate and birth a rape fetus if you got molested at 10?

 

[TheBigZee]

Well, in this case they arguably DID wait six weeks, given that this is evidently a child being raped. If the rape was known of prior to the stated six weeks, then tests ought to have been done immediately.
Unless it took precisely six weeks to be found out, which is a rather "convenient" timeframe.

Or the guy didn't want to put the girl through an ultrasound like the law requires and just gave a number.

No one had any idea this would become law in 3 years. They were expecting to get an incremental overturn of Roe V. Wade.

 

[Android raptor]

What the hell are they putting in your food that a 10 year old can get pregnant, even?

Usually when I was in school it started around 13-14*, for whites. Gypsies get pregnant earlier but they mature faster due to roach darkie genes. Perhaps it was a niglet getting some hood love?**


* Usually a girl would find blood on her seat, and be escorted to the nurse's office. Usually in 8th grade.

** A gypsy girl will remain a virgin while she can hide from her father and is stronger than her brother.

13-14 is late by American standards. Girls who start that late are lucky AF. At this point the average age of menarche in America seems to be like 9-13, with most girls towards the younger end.

In burgerland most girls become capable of getting pregnant long before they are old enough to consent to sex in any capacity.

 

[Trugrade]

W

13-14 is late by American standards. Girls who start that late are lucky AF. At this point the average age of menarche in America seems to be like 9-13, with most girls towards the younger end.

In burgerland most girls become capable of getting pregnant long before they are old enough to consent to sex in any capacity.

Well, chill out on the ‘Burgerland’ if you actually want to be regarded as someone interested in a genuine conversation, and not another eurofag America sucks child.

Responding to the other post, did I not say that me, personally, would be open to stipulations that allow “certain” abortion access? I may not have specified the underage aspect of this, but my stance remains clear. If this girl is allowed an abortion, there better be a clear case with the police involved. This is not a construct to punish pregnant women, but you will see much more accountability because of it. Of course, me personally wouldn’t want to see a 10 child birth another child. What I WANT in law is the reason this pregnancy happened upheld by law.

 

[TheBigZee]

Responding to the other post, did I not say that me, personally, would be open to stipulations that allow “certain” abortion access? I may not have specified the underage aspect of this, but my stance remains clear. If this girl is allowed an abortion, there better be a clear case with the police involved. This is not a construct to punish pregnant women, but you will see much more accountability because of it. Of course, me personally wouldn’t want to see a 10 child birth another child. What I WANT in law is the reason this pregnancy happened upheld by law.

Yeah, that's what I thought when I read your post - it seems like another safeguard to ensure everything was reported. Doctor might have assumed someone else might have reported it, or the report didn't get taken. Now there's an additional report.

 

[Trugrade]

There’s something rather sickening about 30 yo something celebrities celebrating their “1st child!” on the news after they aborted the 10 other ones before they decided they were “ready”.

 

[LurkTrawl]

The law requires a diagnosis. That has a meaning both legally and medically. I'm going to ask you again - what do you diagnose?

Obviously it was not a medical emergency - they wouldn't have been calling a clinic in indianapolis. They would have been sending them to the closest emergency room. That also has a meaning in medicine and the statute sets the requiremet that there can be no possible delay. Delay was obviously possible so the doctors didn't consider it a medical emergency. I don't think most doctors would.

It's either an emergency warranting calling for a clinic in Indianapolis to have it done as soon as possible or it isn't a medical emergency.

Medicine is the most regulated, beauracratic profession there is. After reading the statute, the doctor did the right thing by everyone involved. If Ohio wants doctors to perform an abortion on a six week pregnant ten year old absent a diagosible medical condition or a medical emergency in state they need to make it explicit this statute can't be used against the doctor.

They already did in the quoted sections that you refuse to actually argue with, instead offering conjecture.

The diagnosis has to qualify for an abortion under the exceptions in the law.

Which aren't limited to specifics but rather those that could cause irreparable harm. As I've already quoted those sections I won't again here.

The girl would have to have something wrong with her you can diagnose.

You can absolutely diagnose someone as "being pregnant at ten years old". How on earth do you justify acting as if though a ten year old being pregnant is the same as a fully grown woman being pregnant?

So she'd have to have type 1 diabetes, or multiple sclerosis. Or something in the vague "not limited to". Being 10 isn't a medical diagnosis. The letter of the law requires that.

The letter of the law as pertaining to that I've already quoted and commented on, and it's vague precisely for cases like this. You're actually trying to downplay the one part of this that you should agree with for whatever reason and I hope it isn't just to be disingenuous.

This situation isn't supposed to be covered under the medical allowances. It's covered in other states with a rape/incest exclusion or age of the mother.

Except the language I've pointed out already shows that there's allowances for extenuating circumstances within the bill. That's what you called "vague" earlier. This is why I said you'd have to be ESL to not get what's written as pertaining to these laws, from the sources you yourself have claimed have relevance.

Something is illegal whether you're prosecuted or not. In medicine illegal conduct has ramifications beyond being prosecuted.

But if nobody's being prosecuted, and there's no reasonable argument that a ten year old girl being pregnant isn't a medical emergency, then I fail to understand what exactly the problem here is, seeing as by your own admission no doctor would be tried for this and the legislature didn't intend for this situation... though arguably they did by leaving what you called "wiggle room" earlier for exactly such cases as this if they were to arise.

And don't think I haven't noticed that you've went from quoting the bill to a considerable lack of quotation of it after I started quoting and reading the parts you specified in their entirety.

 

[Mr. Zed da Robot Poon Fed]

Why would you need police investigation to allow a pregnant 10 year old to get an abortion? The simple fact that a 10 year old is pregnant means rape happened. 10 year olds can't consent to sex. Also the police investigation likely started the second it was discovered the 10 year old was pregnant, if not sooner.

Think about it this way, would y'all want to be forced to gestate and birth a rape fetus if you got molested at 10?

It would feel really weird for me to force someone who was raped, let alone a child, to conceive and care for the child, regardless of my stance on abortion. That's like a Herculean task for me. I'm evil, but not that evil.

 

[Mister Ferro]

It would feel really weird for me to force someone who was raped, let alone a child, to conceive and care for the child, regardless of my stance on abortion. That's like a Herculean task for me. I'm evil, but not that evil.

Who is calling for grown adult women to conceive and care for a rape baby? You do know that there are plenty who do conceive their rape babies just to give the baby up for an adoption. Also, in the case that a 10 year girl got raped then there is absolutely no way that the pregnancy will not cause harm. Again there are exceptions for abortions in even the most strictest of laws.

 

[Mayor Adam West]

To pro-life posters here:

I understand your viewpoints on preserving life, even in the womb. But I want to ask: why remain steadfast on that stance for a child being raped to preserve a life that shouldn't had been created under those conditions?

Because it's the right thing to do. If we could undo the rape, we would undo the rape. But abortion does not undo rape. It does not heal any trauma nor is it a noble act. While I agree that prohibiting the girl from getting an abortion might seem bad, the alternative is just horrifying.