Singularity wrote:
It depends on how violent or repetitive the rape was. And the mother's particular situation. The research I did a few years ago revealed that the youngest female human to go into full term labor was seven years old. Both mother and baby died.
If you were the parent of such a child, would you sign her death warrant by insisting she try and fail to give birth?
In the original scenario, how would you deal with sharing custody and care decisions with the child's father?
You are talking about one isolated case where a seven-year-old girl, who apparently ovulated earlier than usual for a girl (usually 8-9 years old, but not impossible for 7 years old), happened to get pregnant from being raped. Something that probably happens
very rarely.
It seems clear to me that that little girl's life was at stake when this happened to her. If her mother signed a document that stated she was giving permission for the child to carry the baby to term, then the deaths of her little girl and the baby are on her. (I would be surprised that a doctor would allow such a thing to happen, to be honest.)
In the original scenario, is this you advocating that the baby should have been aborted to avoid all those problems? I believe strongly that the baby should not be punished with death because they are an inconvenience...or more...to the adults that created it...no matter what the circumstances of causing the pregnancy were. If the woman chooses to keep the baby, and the rapist is granted rights to be involved in that baby's life when he gets out of jail five years later, should the five-year-old child be k**led because it should have been aborted in the first place in order to avoid this complication??
A mother who chooses to keep and raise a baby that came into the world after such a violence to herself, should be praised and held in high esteem for doing such a difficult....but very loving.....thing for that baby. And a woman like that would be very protective of that baby that she has grown to love, in spite of the negativity surrounding the birth.
I would be highly suspicious of a judge that would rule the wife must share custody of the child with her rapist when he got out of a five-year prison term. Especially since the child is living safely and happily in the home with the mother and adoptive father (who should also be held in high esteem for accepting and loving the child in spite of the conditions of the birth.) If this was my husband and I, we would fight that ruling with every ounce of our beings.
I would like to see the statistics on how often that has happened. I tried to find it by searching "court rules in rapists favor for custody" and "raped woman must share custody of the baby with rapist" and other such titles, but nothing even close came up that could tell me either that it has happened at all, or how many times a court ruled in the rapists favor.
If this is an argument that is pro-a******n, it falls flat on several levels.
What I really think matters the most, despite everything else when it comes to a******n..... is that it is NOT THE BABY'S FAULT. The baby should not be punished with death...no matter what the reason for the pregnancy is.
The only exception for a******n
might be if the mother's life were in jeopardy, and I'm not sure even that is a good enough reason to k**l a baby. That baby most likely has a longer life to live than the mother....
Edited to add: I read in your article that there actually quite a few cases where the rapist demands custody. In a lot of them, he just threatens to do so in order to make the mother drop charges for child support. It seems the laws are changing bit by bit in favor of the mothers who keep babies from having to have contact with her rapist. Not enough, though, imo.