If a girl is raped and pregnant, should she keep the baby?

Post Reply New Topic

The mother will feel guilty and will suffer more physical pain than just giving birth to it, not to mention if she does not get therapy she is be VERY depressed. And as for the baby, well it is just plain sad, I mean it is DEAD, and no one seemed to care, it is like the baby was just junk needing to be flushed out. And what country or state are you living in? Health insurance pays for births but not abortions.

And why on God's green earth would you have both? I don't get why people have an abortion and then actually HAVE the next child. Or vice versa. I mean JUST don't get pregnant if you don't want the baby!

I'm not a dude, had way less pain with an abortion than with childbirth, and never got guilty and depressed over having an abortion.

I had no insurance and childbirth is far more expensive than an abortion.

I had a birth because I waited too long to get the abortion. I was young and too scared to go to the doctor. The next time I got pregnant I got down to Planned Parenthood asap.

I don't know what country you are living in. And I know you are female but dude applies to both sexes. Ug. Forget this stupid forum what is the point? Everyone is gunna argue over something.

I'm in the US.

When I got my abortion it was actually paid for by Medicaid. I never paid anything. The adoption agency ended up paying for my hospital bill from childbirth but I didn't know that would happen until after and they didn't pay for the numerous other pregnancy expenses like prenatal care and maternity clothes.

Wow. Ignorant. Abortions are vastly less painful than multiple days of contractions. And the guilt BS is a myth. Google it.



A woman does not owe respect to something that is using her body against her will.

I think its the lesser of the two evils,better to abort the baby you have concied and was forced against your will than to deal with the living reminder that you were raped against you will and the going through labor.I think its inhumane to FORCE rape victims to give birth.Can you also imagine being a bastard child as a result of rape and the possibilities of your own mother hating you due to somee resemblances of the father?

again, you are incorrect. Abortion is less painful (though still a surgical procedure) and less dangerous for the mother than giving birth. Most women who have abortions do not regret it, though they may be said that they were in that position in the first place.
As for the zef, it is not a baby and will suffer no more than had it never been conceived in the first place.
As for my mother, she was pro-choice and I'm glad to know that I was a wanted child from the first, that she lent me her body for 9 months by choice, rather than me being something that was foisted upon her, something that stole her health for that amount of time without her permission, that she had to 'get over.'
None of which is relevant.
No-one gets to use another person's body without their permission, even if they'll die without it.

Because circumstances might have changed since they had an abortion
Because they might have been in an abusive relationship at the time they got pregnant the first time, and they were planning to move out but the place they were going to move into did not want a tenant with a screaming baby
Because the first pregnancy was a lot more difficult health-wise
Because they didn't have a job when they got pregnant the first time and had no way to provide for the oncoming baby
Beause they were halfway through a university degree the first time they got pregnant

Adoption can be harder and more disruptive than abortion in many ways. Being pregnant isn't like something you can do in an afternoon for fun. It's painful and unpredictable. And there is always the possibility of the condom breaking.

In answer to the original question, in this situation it should always be the woman's choice-whatever she wants is the right decision. I dislike the idea of abortion, but I dislike far more the idea of forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy that is the result of rape.

O hai!! ! Welcome to PPR!! !

Birth control is not 100% effective, even with two methods sometimes accidental pregnancies occur. In the US it's very difficult to get sterilization surgery unless you're over 25 or already have 3 children - which is the most absurd control taken by our medical establishment that I've ever heard of - but is real. So the only way to be 100% sure one won't get pregnant is to abstain completely - and of course not get raped!

With all that lack of choice, to take away the choice of abortion would be cruel - for one thing because people would still get abortions, as they always have, but from much less safe sources - so to make it illegal doesn't "save babies" as much as it punishes women who have too little control over their lives as it is.

What gets me about this issue is that it's the conservatives, who always complain about government having too much control, who want to control women's lives this way. Oh ... I guess they don't want women to have all that freedom from control. I get it now. The Patriarchy at work.

Last edited by SpiritBlooms on 09 Nov 2012, 2:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Your question is preposterous. I would not have known, since what later became me was not conscious, not viable, and never would have known the difference.

But the biological mother should always have a choice whether to give birth and whether to keep her child or give it up, and either choice involves sacrifices and quite often a lot of difficulties. There's a lot more guilt and emotional turmoil associated with adoption for birth mothers than there is over abortion. I would much rather be born to a mother who had a choice - whether she decided to keep me or not - than to someone forced to go through pregnancy and birth against her will.

It's all about CHOICE. People who are anti-abortion rarely seem to acknowledge that they're taking CHOICE out of the woman's hands, a woman's freedom to choose what to do with her body, her life. How is that a good or moral thing, that presumption to take a living person's choice away from them, because you think a zygote has rights? Since when is it moral to, for instance, take a person's kidney against their will to transplant it into someone else? You wouldn't allow that, but you'd allow a woman's choice about her body and life to be taken away. That's immoral. I would not want to be the recipient of that organ, nor would I want to live because my mother was forced to give birth.

But this is a futile argument, so I'll leave it at that.

Last edited by SpiritBlooms on 11 Nov 2012, 9:56 am, edited 2 times in total.

Retroactive abortion is probably the lamest argument the anti-choice crew ever invented.

If I was aborted, I would not exist. So what? If my parents had sex 1 minute later or 1 minute before than the time they decided to do, I would not exist either. Who cares?


1) You are bullshitting, you can't predict what will go on the minds on people.
2) The role of law is not to stop people from doing things they might regret but to protect the well-being of people and society.
3) We are speaking about rape. The woman will have to deal with issues no matter what..


If the termination of pregnancy is instant, what is killed is a zygote. Not a baby.

If the termination is early, what is killed is an embryo.

If the termination of pregnancy is not early, what is killed is a fetus. Not a baby.

So, my suggestion is that when a pregnancy is unwanted, it should be terminated as fast and quickly as possible. The sooner abortion happens the better: It is far, far, far of being a baby or a person and closer to being a piece of meat. And the procedure is also much, much safer.

If adoption is a bittersweet option what about the establishment of a commune?

WhhhhooooOoOoOoOoOooOooooooooooooaaaaaaa big boy. Calm down.