posted
I was wondering that too. I mean, they'd have to realize that bringing someone in bound and gagged would trigger some suspicion.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have no words. How could they have thought they were doing anything besides ruining the lives of everyone involved?
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
How horrible. I wonder why they thought it so important that she not go through with the pregnancy?
Posts: 3546 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
There are several federal crimes that could be tacked on, too, possibly enough to get to a life sentence.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
That is disgusting. What the devil is the point of a right to choose, if your parents are making the choice?
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've never seen pro choice taken to such extremes, I never even imagined something like this being likely.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: I've never seen pro choice taken to such extremes, I never even imagined something like this being likely.
There was no choice involved here.
I honestly don't know what the hell the parents were thinking. It would have been easier, although no less deceptive and evil, to let her have the child and force her to give it up for adoption.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:I've never seen pro choice taken to such extremes, I never even imagined something like this being likely.
Unfortunately, I can't say the same. Now, don't get me wrong, this is by far the worst case I've ever heard of, but I've heard many a story of young women being forced into abortions by parents and/or boyfriends. Part of the price of working in a post-abortion counseling ministry and one of the reasons I no longer volunteer in that part of the ministry - too emotionally draining for me. Bless the people who still do it.
One girl talked about how she begged the doctor not to do it, but he told her to shut her eyes and be quiet, her parents knew what was best for her. She stayed on the table praying the whole time for God to forgive her, but she was 14 and her parents told her if she didn't they'd throw her out on the street - she certainly didn't feel like she had a choice. I've heard many stories of being physically threatened by boyfriends and such, a lot of girls that were beaten prior to going for the abortion and told if they didn't get one they'd be killed. It's heartbreaking.
This is the first time I've heard of someone actually being tied up and held at gunpoint, though. How horrid for her. Not only did she undergo a traumatic kidnapping, but there is some serious betrayal of trust when it's your own parents who do it to you. Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm a little annoyed that this is being regarded as a "pro-choicer" action. The whole idea of pro-choice is that one has a CHOICE in the matter. A forced abortion is clearly not a choice.
posted
I was SO trying to just be a little fly in this thread but pH - I'm wondering if people more mean pro-choice as 'the option is available legally' than as 'this is a perfect example of why choice is wrong'? I took that you're getting the latter - sorry if I'm wrong.
*transforms back into a fly and perches on the nearest wall*
Posts: 1355 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is such a small thing in comparison to the real crime, but it seems like an added offence that she wasn't even a minor when they did it.
Posts: 1735 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cmc: I was SO trying to just be a little fly in this thread but pH - I'm wondering if people more mean pro-choice as 'the option is available legally' than as 'this is a perfect example of why choice is wrong'? I took that you're getting the latter - sorry if I'm wrong.
*transforms back into a fly and perches on the nearest wall*
Saying "pro-choice taken to extremes" sounds much closer to the latter to me. Sometimes I wonder if not everyone understands that pro-choice is not the same as ABORTION IS GOOD FOR EVERYONE. YOU HAVE ONE NOW.
posted
Yes, exactly. Call those people anti-fetus or anti-baby or something, but the whole point of pro-choice is for the WOMAN regardless of age, intelligence, religion, parental, peer, or significant other pressure to make the decision. She's the one who has to live with her choice, either way, so she gets to make it.
I find it morally repugnant to try to force or influence someone to have or not to have an abortion. Providing opinions couched in "Well, if I were in your position, which I'm not, here's what I think I would, and here's why" if REQUESTED is appropriate.
Also she was 19 . . . and apparently fairly far along . . . so I really dunno what they were thinking. Not a minor, and possibly not a safe abortion candidate.
But hey - this raises an interesting point. A lot of anti-choice people seem to want parents to be able to keep their children from having abortions. So if that's ok, why couldn't another set or parents force their minor to have one?
Ah yes, back to that whole CHOICE thing . . . let the kiddo who's going to have the kiddo decide . . .
Posts: 471 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Samarkand, even parental notification or consent laws wouldn't apply here, if I'm not mistaken they are for minors under the age of 18? Perhaps I'm wrong and it's 21, but I'm pretty sure it's 18.
And the purpose of notification laws is to prevent a minor child from getting a medical procedure without the knowledge of the parents, and if I'm not mistaken there are in all parental notification laws protections for the minor to petition the court to allow for an abortion if the parents refuse consent.
quote:A lot of anti-choice people...
I have been asked in the past to refrain from calling people on the other side of me "anti-abortion" and acceded to that request out of respect for them. Thus, I am going to ask for the same courtesy. Please refer to my belief system as "pro-life", even "anti-abortion" is okay by me (I don't want to speak for everyone). Anti-choice has a negative overtone, and honestly this thread is not the place for contention. I think all of us, pro-choice and pro-life agree this is a terrible incident and not something any of us would endorse.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Samarkand: But hey - this raises an interesting point. A lot of anti-choice people seem to want parents to be able to keep their children from having abortions. So if that's ok, why couldn't another set or parents force their minor to have one?
If you're going to get pissed off about people using the name of your position incorrectly, at least have the common decency to use the title the other side has chosen to describe themselves. If you're not going to at least afford them that respect, then I don't think you have any right to demand similar respect from them.
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Personally I always liked it with a pro-lifer called my position pro-death.
Any idea why the parents wanted to do this to the kid? I skimmed the article, but i don't recall there being mention of it.
Posts: 74 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Apparently they weren't happy that she was pregnant by a guy who's in jail. That's all the article mentioned.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
There's also speculation that it was racially motivated... making the whole 'thing' that much more horrible. For God's sake - your kids are going to grow up and make choices on their own. You love, respect, be there for them anyway. Tough love means a lot more that being hard on your kids when they're little.
I really don't like this story even a little. It's horrible to me that anyone would put a person through something like that, let alone the parents of that someone.
*tries to resume fly status but aggravation is impeding transformation*
Posts: 1355 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Absolutely, Belle, I did not mean to imply that parental notification would be an issue in this particular instance. Except perhaps for a judge informing them that they're psychotic. I mentioned that in the line above ("Also she was 19 . . . and apparently fairly far along . . . so I really dunno what they were thinking. Not a minor, and possibly not a safe abortion candidate."), but perhaps should have reiterated it for clarity.
I am aware of the laws in place to allow minors to request a judge's review in the case of parental opposition - again, this was not what I was trying to get at, but thank you for mentioning it so I could clarify.
What I was trying to say, is that pregnancy is a medical condition. Going through pregancy and labor seems like a fairly substantial health issue to me. It causes changes in physiology and carries with it certain inherent risks. If parents should be allowed to actively oppose their MINOR child from getting an abortion, what is to prevent them from seeking an abortion for said minor? Parents make the call every day on whether or not to move forward with other surgeries, or to continue or stop chemo - so how is opting for or against an abortion different? From my pro-choice standpoint, I find the restriction of choice to be a slippery slope, regardless of what quarter it is coming from.
Thank you for bringing up the point that terms can be misleading and hurtful. I completely agree with you that sometimes terms are inaccurate. This is why I chose not to use the term "pro-life". It suggests that the other side is "anti-life" which has always conjured up images of pale people in dark clothes staggering about Gothic cities where the gutters run with blood for me, which really isn't where I'm coming from at all.
I will be happy to refer to your position as anti-abortion if that makes you more comfortable. However, I'm curious as to why "anti-choice" would upset you - it's been my understanding that most people who oppose abortion truly wish that no one had the option, or the choice, to get one. Is this incorrect in your case?
Posts: 471 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's an important point, parents choosing with medical procedures. I mean, I'm sure it's very unlikely that a parent would FORCE a child of the appropriate age to have a surgery unless it was absolutely necessary, but it is technically possible as far as I know (by appropriate age, I mean nobody asks an infant if he wants a circumcision). And to deny parents that ability also denies them the ability to keep minors from having surgeries that the parents don't think they should be having. I guess all I'm trying to say is, it really does work both ways.
posted
Yeah, exactly, pH. That's why I feel it's pretty sketchy for parents to lean on their kids either way. If your daughter is looking at the possibility of becoming a parent herself, she needs to be able to make a tough decisions, whatever it might be.
Poor girl. I hope she's doing ok. If anyone sees subsequent articles about her, please post them. I can't believe she had to lock herself in a bathroom in KMart to escape her parents . . .
Posts: 471 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I hope someone finds out more information about the parents like their religion or political affiliation, so we can make gross generalizations and point fingers Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
A truly awful thing. I hope the parents have an entire set of encyclopedias thrown at them for this garbage.
----
Incidentally, since those opposed to abortion are more often painted as the more extreme of the two parties, and get labeled 'pro-choicers' while doing so frequently, I really don't see what's so wrong in labeling those on the opposition who do so by their most common name as well.
Obviously the parents were not 'pro-choice', what they were was 'pro-abortion'. Which is what, I believe, many pro-choicers are. Please note I did not say 'most'.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I find it morally repugnant to try to force or influence someone to have or not to have an abortion.
You find it morally repugnant to try to influence someone to not have an abortion. Yikes. I find the whole idea that someone shouldn't attempt to influence someone else about a decision they believe has serious moral consequences to be morally repugnant.
quote:This is why I chose not to use the term "pro-life". It suggests that the other side is "anti-life" which has always conjured up images of pale people in dark clothes staggering about Gothic cities where the gutters run with blood for me, which really isn't where I'm coming from at all.
Then please do not demand or even ask for any consideration from others concerning how your position will be labeled.
"Pro-choice" is at least as manipulative a term. It's not like pro-choice people are, in general, pro-choice about every possible choice. Leaving out the word "abortion" is incomplete at best and inaccurate at worst.
We could certainly have that full discussion if you like. However, it might be a lot simpler to show a little common courtesy with respect to labels.
If you insist on not using someone's own label for the their position, then use a neutral one. "In favor of abortion being legal" and "against abortion being legal" are accurate, if unwieldy.
quote:I guess all I'm trying to say is, it really does work both ways.
No, it really doesn't. There are many situations in which a parent can prevent a child from doing something but can't force the child to do it. Underage marriage comes to mind immediately.
It's a common pattern: many people can stop an action from occurring, but consent of all involved in the decision chain is required to have it occur.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Where one might say pro-choice had an influence on this case is the absolute demonization of parenthood-- the state of parenthood, not parents per se-- in our society. It's very common for a pro-choice person to say something along the lines of "why should someone have to give up their entire life over one little mistake." Without getting into the refutation of that statement, there is a constant and consistent message from the pro-choice side (to be fair, it comes from fear-oriented birth control advocation on both sides) that a pregnancy before graduating high school, graduating college, getting a master's degree, going to Europe, getting married (all this depending on the person speaking) means the end of the world as you know it.
Of course, in a very real sense, it *is*, but the pro-choice camp, in particular, likes to completely ignore the positive aspect of the whole new world of parenthood which is simultaneously beginning.
In most discussion, pregnancy is treated, by and large, as an illness. Even as a married Catholic, I found my news of another child was often greeted with the question "is this a good thing?" I have written extensively on my answer to that... as has the Catholic Church. One of the things I really like about the Catholic Church is that it is one of the few organizations that has had the courage to stand up in this "modern" world and peg this attitude towards children and childbirth as unhealthy and philosophically a bad idea-- which I think Dag is going to write on extensively in another thread.
Edit: to be clear, I am not trying to establish a causal relationship, but more particularly explaining to pH why people might associate this behavior with an "extreme pro-choice" position.
posted
I don't understand if you're joking as though I were speaking literally, or that you mean you would be opposed to the 'parents' having the book thrown at them, Storm Saxon.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Folks, this has as much to do with "Pro-Choice" as it has to do with "Parental Notification Laws"
Its stupid tragic people making stupid tragic mistakes.
If there were no clean, safe, abortion clinics available for them to go to, they would have taken the woman to some hack in an alley who would not have cared if the girl was tied, chained, or beaten.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, judging from the fact the guy's in jail, while I certainly don't agree with what they did,Rakeesh, I can understand why they were distraught about their daughter giving birth to some dork's kid.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Or they would have attempted to do it themselves. Attempting to induce a miscarriage is the age-old refuge of desperate mothers, fathers and parents.
EDIT:
quote:I can understand why they were distraught about their daughter giving birth to some dork's kid.
There's a long, long gap between 'distraught' and 'murderous'. Although I am pro-choice, I think that forcibly attempting to take a baby's life against the will of the mother is pretty much the same thing as murderous.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
But they were in a state of mind that isn't likely to be repeated. It does nothing to put them in jail.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Storm Saxon: But they were in a state of mind that isn't likely to be repeated.
What state of mind would that be, distraught about their daughter's choices? Because I'm willing to bet good money that IS a state of mind that IS likely to be repeated.
It interests me that the girl's mom has a separate lawyer from her husband. I wonder what that means.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Saxon: I understand what you mean, but the law doesn't work like that. If you commit a crime, regardless of whether you're going to do it ever again, it's still a crime. The crime isn't nullified from being a one-off thing. A murder is still a murder, even if you're never going to do it again- same goes for kidnapping.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think a rule like would create a "the first one is free" rule. The first kidnapping, the first assault, the first embezzling, the first robbery, the first murder. I don't think that's a good idea.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
I'm wondering if they tested the parents' sobriety.
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
