10 year old girl has to travel out of state to get abortio

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re:
------------------
You can confirm that an event happened without releasing a name. The doctor went public with it right?

This reminds me of all the stories during the pandemic which also could not be verified. All the crying nurses, etc.
-------------------

No, you cannot. Not as a govenment agency. There are special restrictions on potential identifiers such as age (at any given time, "pregnant" + "specific very young age" in "specific area" is going to be a likely unique identifier). Private citizens are bound by fear of being sued, but public employees have specific presumptive restrictions.

Test it. Call up your local CPS unit -- for DC, it's CFSA at https://cfsa.dc.gov/service/report-child-abuse-and-neglect . Ask if they can confirm or deny that, say, there is a pregnant 11 year old. Just do it. I'd bet a paycheck that you do not get a straight yes or no.

Put your money where your mouth it. Test that assumption you are so fond of. See if it holds.

Did you call, PP?

No. I was too busy following up on the results of the FOIA in Ohio. No one - NO ONE can confirm the story. It's a lie

Someone FOIAd every police department in Ohio?

What, you think PP would shitpost without having the receipts to back it up? Well, I never! /s

The Ohio DA, police departments, and abortion clinics have no record. In addition, Dr. Bernard is full of comments in the past, was outspoken prior, but now is all 'no comment'. She has a history of not reporting abuse cases to the state, something she is legally bound to do.

Every police department and county/city/township prosecutor in Ohio?

The DA. So yes

Someone was claiming earlier that everyone had been FOIAd. DA saying something on Fox is not equivalent to that.

The DA publicly stating this information can be taken as true and factual based on his position and access to the information. At this point, the burden of proof is on thw side claiming this happened-- both that the girl exists and that the law would preclude her from obtaining an abortion in Ohio. It appears neither of those things are true.

I lived through the Trump years. I no longer assume Republicans are telling the truth, ever.

[Anonymous]

The right’s desperation about this story not being verifiable, necessary because of doctor-patient privilege, reminds me of how they were furious about the leak of the Dobbs decision. Shouldn’t you all be triumphant that you won?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought we all knew this was a fishy story since the law wouldnt actually require her to leave the state?

Why wouldn’t it?

This.
No exceptions for rape or incest, no matter the age of the child.
It is disgusting that some of you think that's acceptable.

According to the Ohio AG, there is an exception for anyone to get an abortion when there is a health risk.
This child would qualify.

Here's the problem when you legislate health matters: you might intend one thing, but the actual health providers making health care decisions are going to go with the most conservative interpretation of your laws to cover themselves, or else will use the law to impose their own extreme conservative views on their patients. We've seen this time and again when pharmacists, for example, say they cannot dispense certain medications because of laws. Or when hospital lawyers tell their staff that they have to wait until a fallopian tube bursts to remove an ectopic pregnancy.

So you can blather on all you want about "that's not what the law states/intends" but again, when non-health professionals muck about making laws and regulations about health care decisions then these sorts of things are going to happen.

And you better believe there are people out there who think a 10 year old should just go through with a pregnancy, and if they happen to be the person making the decision about whether that child can get an abortion, well, she is out of luck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The right’s desperation about this story not being verifiable, necessary because of doctor-patient privilege, reminds me of how they were furious about the leak of the Dobbs decision. Shouldn’t you all be triumphant that you won?

I thought it wasn't lack of medical info, but it's something about criminal filing and investigation of rape, especially given that a child is a victim. This would go beyond doctors of doctor-patient privilege and involve criminal justice system?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The right’s desperation about this story not being verifiable, necessary because of doctor-patient privilege, reminds me of how they were furious about the leak of the Dobbs decision. Shouldn’t you all be triumphant that you won?

I thought it wasn't lack of medical info, but it's something about criminal filing and investigation of rape, especially given that a child is a victim. This would go beyond doctors of doctor-patient privilege and involve criminal justice system?

DP. Wait, I'm unclear on something -- are you under the impression that details of criminal investigations involving minors are not under privacy restrictions, or am I misreading you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The right’s desperation about this story not being verifiable, necessary because of doctor-patient privilege, reminds me of how they were furious about the leak of the Dobbs decision. Shouldn’t you all be triumphant that you won?

I thought it wasn't lack of medical info, but it's something about criminal filing and investigation of rape, especially given that a child is a victim. This would go beyond doctors of doctor-patient privilege and involve criminal justice system?

DP. Wait, I'm unclear on something -- are you under the impression that details of criminal investigations involving minors are not under privacy restrictions, or am I misreading you?

I didn't say this. I am responding to the post that mentions doctor-patient privilege as the reason for records not been accessible. I am saying that the complaint of the "hoaxers" isn't about medical records absence but about supposed absence of criminal justice system records regarding this case. This obviously doesn't mean that these records don't exist, the details just aren't in the news.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's super weird that people don't realize girls are getting their periods earlier, before they are ready, and there are juvenile and adult males eager and ready to take advantage of them.

So now that you can't prove this story is true, you are moving the goalposts? The issue HERE is that a story is out there saying a 10 year old girl was refused an abortion after being raped and has to go out of state. Whether it COULD happen is NOT the issue. The question is, is THIS story true. Repeating that it can't be verified simply raises my suspicions.

I agree. I've been wondering when this story would be verified, and was pretty sure this would be the outcome. All I want to know is *did this happen*. Seems like some stories have taken a life of their own. This seems to be a pattern on the left - throw out a shocking story and insist it's true. And now anyone who has some doubts about whether it actually happened will be called all manner of names, as usual. Really sick of this.

"This is a very difficult story to check. Bernard is on the record, but obtaining documents or other confirmation is all but impossible without details that would identify the locality where the rape occurred.

With news reports around the globe and now a presidential imprimatur, however, the story has acquired the status of a “fact” no matter its provenance. If a rapist is ever charged, the fact finally would have more solid grounding."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/07/09/one-source-story-about-10-year-old-an-abortion-goes-viral/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The right’s desperation about this story not being verifiable, necessary because of doctor-patient privilege, reminds me of how they were furious about the leak of the Dobbs decision. Shouldn’t you all be triumphant that you won?

"Desperation"? On the contrary, the left seems desperate to make sure the public believes this story, without any evidence whatsoever. Of course the girl's information wouldn't be released - but the rapist's information and arrest most definitely would. So where is it? Why hasn't he been arrested yet?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re:
------------------
You can confirm that an event happened without releasing a name. The doctor went public with it right?

This reminds me of all the stories during the pandemic which also could not be verified. All the crying nurses, etc.
-------------------

No, you cannot. Not as a govenment agency. There are special restrictions on potential identifiers such as age (at any given time, "pregnant" + "specific very young age" in "specific area" is going to be a likely unique identifier). Private citizens are bound by fear of being sued, but public employees have specific presumptive restrictions.

Test it. Call up your local CPS unit -- for DC, it's CFSA at https://cfsa.dc.gov/service/report-child-abuse-and-neglect . Ask if they can confirm or deny that, say, there is a pregnant 11 year old. Just do it. I'd bet a paycheck that you do not get a straight yes or no.

Put your money where your mouth it. Test that assumption you are so fond of. See if it holds.

Did you call, PP?

No. I was too busy following up on the results of the FOIA in Ohio. No one - NO ONE can confirm the story. It's a lie

Someone FOIAd every police department in Ohio?

What, you think PP would shitpost without having the receipts to back it up? Well, I never! /s

The Ohio DA, police departments, and abortion clinics have no record. In addition, Dr. Bernard is full of comments in the past, was outspoken prior, but now is all 'no comment'. She has a history of not reporting abuse cases to the state, something she is legally bound to do.

I think Dr. Bernard is our next Jussie Smollett.

And, the IndyStar is the new Rolling Stone.

Bingo on both counts. If this turns out to be a fake story, there isn't enough disgust in the world for me to heap upon this doctor and those posters who were ranting about it here daily. Absolutely sick.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The right’s desperation about this story not being verifiable, necessary because of doctor-patient privilege, reminds me of how they were furious about the leak of the Dobbs decision. Shouldn’t you all be triumphant that you won?

"Desperation"? On the contrary, the left seems desperate to make sure the public believes this story, without any evidence whatsoever. Of course the girl's information wouldn't be released - but the rapist's information and arrest most definitely would. So where is it? Why hasn't he been arrested yet?

Would his info be released if he is also a minor?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re:
------------------
You can confirm that an event happened without releasing a name. The doctor went public with it right?

This reminds me of all the stories during the pandemic which also could not be verified. All the crying nurses, etc.
-------------------

No, you cannot. Not as a govenment agency. There are special restrictions on potential identifiers such as age (at any given time, "pregnant" + "specific very young age" in "specific area" is going to be a likely unique identifier). Private citizens are bound by fear of being sued, but public employees have specific presumptive restrictions.

Test it. Call up your local CPS unit -- for DC, it's CFSA at https://cfsa.dc.gov/service/report-child-abuse-and-neglect . Ask if they can confirm or deny that, say, there is a pregnant 11 year old. Just do it. I'd bet a paycheck that you do not get a straight yes or no.

Put your money where your mouth it. Test that assumption you are so fond of. See if it holds.

Did you call, PP?

No. I was too busy following up on the results of the FOIA in Ohio. No one - NO ONE can confirm the story. It's a lie

Someone FOIAd every police department in Ohio?

What, you think PP would shitpost without having the receipts to back it up? Well, I never! /s

The Ohio DA, police departments, and abortion clinics have no record. In addition, Dr. Bernard is full of comments in the past, was outspoken prior, but now is all 'no comment'. She has a history of not reporting abuse cases to the state, something she is legally bound to do.

Every police department and county/city/township prosecutor in Ohio?

The DA. So yes

Someone was claiming earlier that everyone had been FOIAd. DA saying something on Fox is not equivalent to that.

The DA publicly stating this information can be taken as true and factual based on his position and access to the information. At this point, the burden of proof is on thw side claiming this happened-- both that the girl exists and that the law would preclude her from obtaining an abortion in Ohio. It appears neither of those things are true.

I lived through the Trump years. I no longer assume Republicans are telling the truth, ever.

LOL!
I lived all my years in DC. I no longer assume any politicians of any political party are telling the truth, ever.
As the cliche goes - live and learn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You really have to wonder about the people that make this stuff up. Like this doctor had to create such a disgusting story when in reality, there probably is a rape victim impacted by the ruling. The selfishness and stupidity of this doctor is mind blowing.

She should lose her medical license and serve time.

I haven’t seen proof that the story is fabricated.

And you wont, because you cant prove a negative. Thats how conspiracy theories work.

Well certainly the right knows all about conspiracy theories.

But there’s no “conspiracy” here. Do you think it’s impossible for a 10 year old to become pregnant?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re:
------------------
You can confirm that an event happened without releasing a name. The doctor went public with it right?

This reminds me of all the stories during the pandemic which also could not be verified. All the crying nurses, etc.
-------------------

No, you cannot. Not as a govenment agency. There are special restrictions on potential identifiers such as age (at any given time, "pregnant" + "specific very young age" in "specific area" is going to be a likely unique identifier). Private citizens are bound by fear of being sued, but public employees have specific presumptive restrictions.

Test it. Call up your local CPS unit -- for DC, it's CFSA at https://cfsa.dc.gov/service/report-child-abuse-and-neglect . Ask if they can confirm or deny that, say, there is a pregnant 11 year old. Just do it. I'd bet a paycheck that you do not get a straight yes or no.

Put your money where your mouth it. Test that assumption you are so fond of. See if it holds.

Did you call, PP?

No. I was too busy following up on the results of the FOIA in Ohio. No one - NO ONE can confirm the story. It's a lie

Someone FOIAd every police department in Ohio?

What, you think PP would shitpost without having the receipts to back it up? Well, I never! /s

The Ohio DA, police departments, and abortion clinics have no record. In addition, Dr. Bernard is full of comments in the past, was outspoken prior, but now is all 'no comment'. She has a history of not reporting abuse cases to the state, something she is legally bound to do.

Every police department and county/city/township prosecutor in Ohio?

The DA. So yes

Someone was claiming earlier that everyone had been FOIAd. DA saying something on Fox is not equivalent to that.

DA would be aware of any and all FOIAs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The right’s desperation about this story not being verifiable, necessary because of doctor-patient privilege, reminds me of how they were furious about the leak of the Dobbs decision. Shouldn’t you all be triumphant that you won?

Has the leaker been revealed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The right’s desperation about this story not being verifiable, necessary because of doctor-patient privilege, reminds me of how they were furious about the leak of the Dobbs decision. Shouldn’t you all be triumphant that you won?

"Desperation"? On the contrary, the left seems desperate to make sure the public believes this story, without any evidence whatsoever. Of course the girl's information wouldn't be released - but the rapist's information and arrest most definitely would. So where is it? Why hasn't he been arrested yet?

Would his info be released if he is also a minor?

The arrest would be released, not his hame.