AIBU in thinking that anyone who had ever actually given birth would never let an 11 year old make the decision to give birth?

[MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps]

And that if an 11 year old can't make the decision to have consensual sex she can't possibly understand the complexities of pregnancy and labor? Especially as doctors have said it could kill her?

If you haven't heard of this it's one of the most upsetting stories I have ever read in a long while.

latino.foxnews.com/latino/health/2013/07/10/chile-president-praises-pregnant-11-year-old-maturity-for-keeping-baby/

i do not think it will just be sex workers it will be women who are carrying girls, it will be women who's partner/husband do not want more children, it will be girls who's parents feel it is more important to not bring shame on the family than how their daughter feels

70 I suspect that will be decided based on the presidents position on c sections.

God forbid medical evidence or the opinions of the girl or her advocates should come inti it.
I wonder whether her teachers are any supporr

they have the lowest rate of female employment in Latin America

were they sex workers carpe? they're not worth anything if they can't make money

Doubtful. I did at least have enough money for a slightly more expensive abortion, with an (allegedly) real doctor. The bulk of sex workers generally didn't earn enough for that sort of expense. They went to the cheaper places. I never saw inside the real hell holes at the bottom of the market. Know a few men who would only cough up for them and not something more "upmarket" when their paid for girlfriend got pregnant though.

from wiki
its a shocking place to be female

Gender roles

Traditional gender role beliefs are prevalent in Chilean society, specifically the ideas that women should focus on motherhood and be submissive to men.[13] A 2010 study by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) reported that 62 percent of Chileans are opposed to full gender equality. Many of those surveyed expressed the belief that women should limit themselves to the traditional roles of mother and wife.[3][14] However, the 2012 World Development Report states that male attitudes toward gender equality are that "men do not lose out when women's rights are promoted."[15]
Legal rights

Currently, women have many of the same rights as men.[16] The National Women's Service (SERNAM) is charged with protecting women's legal rights in the public sector.[16][17]
Marriage

Until recently, women lost their right to manage their own assets once they were married, but that law has since changed.[18] and husbands received all of the wealth,[5] but now a woman can administer her own assets.[18] A couple can also sign a legal agreement before marriage so that all assets would continue to be owned by the one who brought them to the marriage.[18]

Previously the Chilean Civil Code mandated that wives must live with and be faithful and obedient to their husbands, but now it is not law.[5] A married woman cannot be head of the household or head of the family in the same way as a man; however, married women are not required by law to obey their husbands.[19]

that's horrific carpe, we're looking at that in the states right now in a few areas. I really can't wait to get out

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_youngest_birth_mothers

Sadly this is far from unusual. I got sucked into reading the above wiki page one evening, and I was horrified by it.

I just wonder how you can ever force even a child into getting rid of something that they wish to keep, something inside them, not some toy.

She should be given the respect to have an informed choice. Everything should be done to ensure that she is supported regardless of her choice.

I am not sure what value is given by forcing a woman to abort a baby, nor can I see the value in forcing a woman to have a baby. She should not be steered, groomed, cajoled either way.

Why is everyone going on about forced abortions?

This child does not have the option of an abortion, forced or otherwise.

She is being used as a political pawn, the president is saying, "If an 11 year old can have a baby why do we need legal abortion in Chile?"

aldi you can force a child to when they don't have the capacity to make a reasonable informed decision. See the links on the last page re laws in this country (UK).

At what age would you say a child cash make this kind if choice?!!

And if you read the article you would see this girl has NO choice, its illegal for her to have an abortion anyway,and there is no way she ius making any kind if choice. She is a child who has been abused and raped and is now being manipulated and used by a pro life, mysoginistic government.

she's not in any kind of way capable of making an informed choice. even if she were being given a choice.

he's phrased it as though she's chosen to be pg but abortion for rape or life of mother are illegal there

he's phrased it as though she's chosen to be pg but abortion for rape or life of mother are illegal there

Exactly. And she could be the catalyst for increased popular support for a change to the current draconian set up if not...nutralised.

I am in general against abortion but this is one case where I feel the child should be counselled towards it.
Those photographs though-they show an obviously developing human baby not 'a bunch of cells'. Have an abortion if you are certain it is right but know what you are doing.
This little girl has already been through hell and the mother and stepfather are wicked people.

Have an abortion if you are certain it is right but know what you are doing.

That's not your call. You don't get to dictate emotional connections over biological reality for other people. And to be honest you would be surprised just how many women on a personal level think "baby" and then abort BECAUSE they think "baby" not "bunch of cells".

To me, while biologically it's embryo, foetus, baby, I've never peed on a stick, seen a positive result and not emotionally connected as anything other than "baby".

If I hadn't I wouldn't have been quite so determined to abort regardless of the high stakes. I could have remain detached to the future of "a bunch of cells", but "baby", not so much. And it wasn't until I made a conscious choice to reject not speaking about my abortion (where relevant, it's not like I go "good morning, coffee? BTW did I ever tell you about my abortion ?") that I discovered I was nothing like as unique as I had believed myself to be.

To be honest I don't think anti-abortion leaning people can ever truly know the range of thought processes and emotional content for women who have them.

It most often takes a degree of trust to reveal the details. And there is no trust that an anti abortion leaning person won't hear rather than listen, only to poke you with the "baby killer" stick just when they think they have you at your most vulnerable.

So naturally enough people tend to be a bit cagey and your lot in particular only get to hear the emotionally disconnected discourse of debate rather than human experience.

Plus there is the issue that the only really socially acceptable admittance of abortion is to express regret and a long term price paid. So a quite skewed picture emerges on both sides of the fence.

There tends to be quite a few shocked faces when you are quite clear that the abortion is not regretted and by and large no terrible price was paid. I think the majority of people regret getting pregnant in the first place. But that doesn't generally appease people who, even when reasonably fence sitting/slightly pro choice, do prefer to see a universal, massive haematoma on hearts as some kind of penance.

To reveal yourself as pretty much unscathed in the longer term doesn't really fit the preferred vision where abortion has long term physical and emotional ramifications as a rule and pregnancy and birth does not. Despite evidence pointing to the preferred vision being the direct opposite of reality.

exactly sashh. I doubt she even thinks abortion is an option. Her statement sounds suspiciously like what they want her to say. No one would physically pin her down for an abortion (I hope!) but as a just out of primary school aged child she NEEDS a lot of guidance as to what is best for her current and long term health and wellbeing. It's impossible to be independent as everyone will have an opinion but at the moment she is definitely only getting one side.

Her statement sounds suspiciously like what they want her to say

Almost as if it were written for her. And then reported as being the reality.

Ultimatley even if she were actually plonked in front of a press conference and said the same, (given how high the stakes are for the gov. in question should she become a catalyst that provoked even more popular support for a relaxing of the current legal status of abortion,) it would be impossible to be certain that she wasn't parrotting what she was told to say on pain of sanctions as soon as she got off camera.

Abortion is not an option.

What do you mean Bonsoir? Because it's illegal?

If she has conceived her body has obviously reached sexual maturity so I am not sure why people think her body would not be able to cope with the physical aspects of preganancy and birth, although with being so young she might have a CS particularly as she is a high profile case and they won't be wanting anything to go wrong.

The emotional aspects are of course something else!

Health and social outcomes are much poorer for younger mothers and their babies. And that research will have been done on older children than her.

If she has conceived her body has obviously reached sexual maturity

There is no lack of literature that reveals the distinct disadvantages to both mother and child where pregnancy takes place in the very young and the young.

Aside from that, the biological doesn't tend to be our line in the sand. Emotional maturity does. Hence the laws prohibiting pedophilia. If you take the view that precocious onset of breast development and menarche is proof positive that the child is physically and emotionally ready to see a pregnancy to term and give birth it is contradictory to then say "but not so much for sex".

If you read the list of the world's youngest mothers, many of them started to menstruate very early, some at under a year of age. Almost all of them were being sexually abused by an adult known to the family. Some were being prostituted by their own family. Their readiness for anything based on that physical and emotional trauma alone needs to be questioned.

Nature doesn't "design" us. It is not a well rounded, individuated plan that does't give an individual more than they can cope with. It aims for good enough, has blips and hiccups.

That's why we write laws rather than base our assumptions of a child's readiness for sexual activity and reproduction on the specific stage of biological development in a child.

x-post