What happened to that poor 10-year-old girl who was pregnant?

She was taken to another state and a doctor performed the abortion. That doctor is getting harassed now.

The abortion was done.

The doctor was the victim of some disciplinary action but not substantial.

The father – just recently, like that last 10 days – went to jail, I believe. On another criminal count.

That case makes me want to vomit on everything Republican.

Is he going to be charged with rape?

Who got her pregnant?

From what I understand it was a friend of the families.
Anyone who does that to a child should be castrated with a butter knife.

^^^^^^ Ball peen hammer comes to mind ! ^^^^^^

news article

Apparently indicted, not jailed yet.

He raped her twice. I hope he gets his ass beaten in jail.

Just to add, according to the link from @elbanditoroso the Ohio law contains no exception for rape or incest. This is why these laws are so punitive. So the 10 year old is supposed to give birth to a baby because of some sick, perverted fuck? it’s totally ridiculous.

It would rip the child apart.

Exactly @Dutchess_III but the Fright wing don’t care it’s a wonderful little life who cares if the rape victim dies in child birth.
You can’t have an abortion because thats BAAAAAD!

Republicans will say she seduced him and she shouldn’t have opened her legs.

Yep.

They haven’t stooped that low have they??^
Actually claiming the victim is some what responsible for what happened to her?

Gerson Fuentes sentenced to 25 to life. Minimum of 25 before being considered for parole. Parole not likely, will probably be deported at that point.

Thanks for the name, @smudges. I googled and found this if anybody is looking for details. I hope, sincerely, that he gets his ass beaten in prison:

https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/05/us/gerson-fuentes-ohio-rape-case-guilty-plea/index.html

The girl was taken from Ohio to Indiana and she got an abortion. The rapist, an illegal alien, was sentenced to 25 years in prison. The mother is defending the rapist.

Maybe the child is in foster care, now, if the mother is defending her rapist. We wouldn’t be privy to that but it seems like it should be a possibility.

Wow seawulf

If that article is true @seawulf575 it’s again beyond disgusting ,and if the mother is indeed defending the attacker then she should face charges as well, but stop harassing the Doctor that gave the CHILD the abortion.

@SQUEEKY2 From what I can gather the doctor did everything she was supposed to do in the way of notifications, paperwork, etc. That seems to be where she is getting a lot of heat. Not sure why that is happening. There may be more to the story, but from what I can see they shouldn’t be harassing her.

In the artcile I read last night, the doctor was taking heat for not reporting it, but in the meantime the police already knew about it, so it was already reported.

@jca2 the article you cited said the Indiana AG was looking into whether HIPPA laws were violated by the doctor calling the press to report it. There is a linked article in your article that shows they understand she reported it properly from the aspect of reporting a rape, a minor being impregnated, an abortion performed, etc. The question was the privacy of the patient. I don’t know how that washed out.

^^ She did not reveal the name of the patient from everything I’ve read.

No, @seawulf575 the article I was referring to was not an article I linked. I ddn’t say I linked it, I said I read it. I didn’t link it because it’s from the NY Times, and I know that NY Times has a paywall, and most Jellies don’t subscribe so they can’t read it. So unless I feel (or felt) like cutting and pasting, and removing all the ads and other fluff that they put in their articles, which takes a lot of time, I don’t always feel like cutting and pasting from the Times.

I did just look at the article again and cut and pasted the paragraph that refers to the doctor. Here is what the paragraph said:

“t looks like the only thing Bernard did wrong, though, is to embarrass Republicans. On Thursday afternoon, The Star reported that Bernard reported the abortion to the Indiana Department of Health and the Department of Child Services, as state law requires. In a statement, her lawyer said she’s considering legal action against Rokita and others who have “smeared” her.”

@jca2 I recognize you weren’t referring to the article you linked before. I just mentioned that the article you linked before had something on it as well.

@seawulf575 Oh, ok gotcha.

I think this is the article you were referring to. It seems they brought some allegations but dropped 2 out of 3. I’m not an attorney but it does look like they were busting chops and she might have a case for going after “Rokka and others who smeared her” (as referred to in the Times article).
https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/26/us/dr-caitlin-bernard-indiana-medical-board-hearing/index.html

@jca2 Actually it was two articles linked in the one you provided. The first had this statement from the Indiana AG:

”“The failure to do so constitutes a crime in Indiana, and her behavior could also affect her licensure. Additionally, if a HIPAA violation did occur, that may affect next steps as well,” Rokita said in a statement. HIPAA – the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act – sets privacy standards for protecting patients’ personal medical information.”

The second Was this one you referenced and it shows she did violate privacy laws and was subsequently reprimanded and fined by the state medical board:

“CNN – An Indianapolis doctor who publicly revealed she provided abortion services to a 10-year-old Ohio rape victim last year has been reprimanded and fined by Indiana’s medical licensing board after it determined the disclosure violated federal and state patient privacy laws.

The board on Thursday found Dr. Caitlin Bernard, an obstetrician-gynecologist, liable on three counts of violating patient privacy laws after Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita filed a complaint against the doctor in November.

However, the board dismissed two other allegations in the complaint, determining she did not violate laws requiring physicians to immediately report suspected child abuse and keep abreast of mandatory reporting and patient privacy laws.

Bernard will be fined $3,000 and receive a letter of reprimand, according to the board, which agreed to allow her to continue practicing medicine.

The complaint alleged that Bernard violated patient privacy law when she discussed the case of the girl without the consent of the patient or a guardian – even while not using her name – over the summer with the Indianapolis Star.”

I’m no lawyer and God knows our entire justice system is screwed up, but it might be hard to hold the AG accountable for doing his job, even if you don’t like what he had to say about what they were looking at. As far as I can tell he always said something along the lines of “We are investigating whether she…” Wiggle words that avoid defamation lawsuits. There may be more to the story that we are not seeing off a couple articles.

Whether HIPAA was slightly broken or not (I don’t think it was, but let’s say it was) it doesn’t change that a ten year old was raped and the pro-life extremists are ok letting that girl go through major surgery for a c-section or be split in two birthing a baby. She would be more likely to miscarry, but the miscarriage she might have had would have been farther along than doing an immediate abortion.

If she actually carried past the 6th months she would be more likely to go into labor early because of her age, and more likely to have medical problems from the pregnancy. Pregnancy is a strain on the body no matter how old, but very young and older pregnant women are more at risk.

Breaking HIPAA does not change the facts, all it does is put the doctor’s license in jeopardy. That was the doctor’s choice. Dwelling on that is a distraction from the main issue of availability of abortion services.

I don’t know if anyone mentioned this above, but I am pretty sure it was a medical abortion not a surgical abortion. I think she was just shortly past 6 weeks pregnant; well within the usual ten week limit, and it can be used even beyond ten weeks. I don’t know the exact parameters that are used.

I don’t know how Rep/cons can actually defend their idiot law with cases like this.