Texas Teen Wins Right to Give Birth Over Parents’ Objections

[rockin'robin]

A pregnant teen who sued her parents, claiming they were coercing her to have an abortion, will be able to give birth to her baby.

Attorneys representing the 16-year-old girl were granted a long-term injunction against the girl's parents in Texas family court on Monday, according to court documents.

The teen is 10 weeks pregnant and the injunction will last for the duration of her pregnancy.

As part of the order, the girl will be able to use her car to go to school, work and medical appointments. Her parents had taken away the use of the car as part of their effort to force an abortion, court papers stated.

The teen's parents will be liable for half of the hospital bill when she gives birth, unless she is married to the baby's 16-year-old father.

"We are extremely happy with the judge's decision today and we are very proud of our teenage client for being strong enough to stand against her parents to save her unborn child's life," Greg Terra, president of the Texas Center for Defense of Life, said in a blog post on the group's website.

Attorneys filed a lawsuit on the teen's behalf earlier this month arguing that her parents "are violating her federal constitutional rights to carry her child to term by coercing her to have an abortion with both verbal and physical threats and harassment."

The teen, identified in the lawsuit only as R.E.K. since she is a minor, was "beside herself" when she called the center for help, her lawyer Stephen Casey told ABCNews.com last week. The group claims it has previously represented teens in similar situations and won their cases.

"These girls are in a bind, particularly in a situation where their parents are forcing them to do something they don't want to do," Casey said. "Regardless of the [situation], that's her parents and she should expect support from them in this situation, not resentment and anger."

When the pregnancy was confirmed, the teenager's father allegedly "became extremely angry, was insistent that R.E.K. was not having the baby, and that the decision was not up to her, according to the lawsuit. He stated he was going to take her to have an abortion and that the decision was his, end of story."

The teen claimed in the lawsuit that her parents had taken away her phone, pulled her out of school, forced her to get two jobs and took away her car in an effort to "make her miserable so that she would give in to the coercion and have the abortion."'

Texas Teen Wins Right to Give Birth Over Parents’ Objections - ABC News

 

[TXgolfer]

 

[Foxrac]

Texas isn't place for pro-abortion parents or ability to kick pregnant teenagers out.

My parent told my sister if she was pregnancy so she will have to go to terminate the pregnancy or getting kick out of their house because they didn't want financial obligation for pregnancy. That effectively scared her and didn't want become pregnancy now, also I support my parent's case if she couldn't afford to take care of child, but if she has money, so it is totally up to her.

 

[Foxrac]

Texas isn't place for pro-abortion parents or ability to kick pregnant teenagers out.

My parent told my sister if she was pregnancy so she will have to go to terminate the pregnancy or getting kick out of their house because they didn't want financial obligation for pregnancy. That effectively scared her and didn't want become pregnancy now, also I support my parent's case if she couldn't afford to take care of child, but if she has money, so it is totally up to her.

I like to make additional based on my thought about her parent.

If her parent hasn't make any threaten to their daughter so it will be different story, but if they did so they will lose some of rights with court order.

My parent's explanation to my sister is actually tactic that force my sister to make a best decision instead of make a wrong choice. My parent did many tactics to me and they were strict parent during my teenager. I already know that illegal drugs (except for weeds) are bad and they explored many presentation about how bad are drugs, however they told me that alcoholic beverage is ok in moderation and the smoking is bad. Thanks to strict parent, I don't become a drug addict and don't make any bad choice that ruin my life. They don't allowed me and my sister to have a sex with someone until 18th birthday, but they did teach us about safe sex during teenager era (13-16), in case for preparation before 18th birthday. I have better understanding about financial consequence when have a family or a baby.

If I have a child, so I will be different from parent - no spanking or corporal punishment, no physical abuses involved because I don't believe in physical harm to the child as punishment, however will be strict to ensure that they are in correct path. If my child becomes pregnancy during teenager, I will offer options, including adoption, abortion or keep it at her responsibility. Depending on financial situation, if I have limited money so couldn't afford to help some part of expenses, they have find a way to get source to support, if I have plenty of money, so I will pay some of expenses until my child turns 18, or possibly little longer.

Make threatening against pregnancy teens are bad.

 

[rockin'robin]

Most parents would be disappointed if their teenage daughter was pregnant....but these parents took it to the extreme.

Adoption is an option....and if an underage teen got my daughter pregnant, I would take him to Court....

 

[CrazyPaul]

Most parents would be disappointed if their teenage daughter was pregnant....but these parents took it to the extreme.

Adoption is an option....and if an underage teen got my daughter pregnant, I would take him to Court....

That's understandable. But a judge would tell you that your daughter is at fault, too. You could try to sue his parents for financial support since he's underage.

 

[rockin'robin]

That's understandable. But a judge would tell you that your daughter is at fault, too. You could try to sue his parents for financial support since he's underage.

Yep...that's the idea...more and more grandparents' are having to raise their grandchildren, draining their retirement funds....and I just don't feel a 16 yr. old is mature or even ready to be a parent, these teens have no idea of the responsibility it entails.....

 

[CrazyPaul]

Yep...that's the idea...more and more grandparents' are having to raise their grandchildren, draining their retirement funds....and I just don't feel a 16 yr. old is mature or even ready to be a parent, these teens have no idea of the responsibility it entails.....

Maybe that's one of the reasons why her parents told her to get an abortion. However, the teen made the decision since it's her body. I am sure that her parents told her that they don't want to be responsible for her baby so she's on her own to support her baby with the help from the baby's father. They have to work. BTW, her parents' health insurance should cover the cost of childbirth.

My friend's 17 yrs old son got her underage girlfriend pregnant so he dropped out of high school and got a job to support them. He got a GED later. That was 6 yrs ago.

 

[KarissaMann05]

Someone pointed out:

"If she chooses abortion, she's a mature adult and would get a lot of applause. But, if she choose life, she's just a minor who don't know what she's doing and would get a lot of slut-slamming comments."

 

[LuciaDisturbed]

A pregnant teen who sued her parents, claiming they were coercing her to have an abortion, will be able to give birth to her baby.

Attorneys representing the 16-year-old girl were granted a long-term injunction against the girl's parents in Texas family court on Monday, according to court documents.

The teen is 10 weeks pregnant and the injunction will last for the duration of her pregnancy.

As part of the order, the girl will be able to use her car to go to school, work and medical appointments. Her parents had taken away the use of the car as part of their effort to force an abortion, court papers stated.

The teen's parents will be liable for half of the hospital bill when she gives birth, unless she is married to the baby's 16-year-old father.

"We are extremely happy with the judge's decision today and we are very proud of our teenage client for being strong enough to stand against her parents to save her unborn child's life," Greg Terra, president of the Texas Center for Defense of Life, said in a blog post on the group's website.

Attorneys filed a lawsuit on the teen's behalf earlier this month arguing that her parents "are violating her federal constitutional rights to carry her child to term by coercing her to have an abortion with both verbal and physical threats and harassment."

The teen, identified in the lawsuit only as R.E.K. since she is a minor, was "beside herself" when she called the center for help, her lawyer Stephen Casey told ABCNews.com last week. The group claims it has previously represented teens in similar situations and won their cases.

"These girls are in a bind, particularly in a situation where their parents are forcing them to do something they don't want to do," Casey said. "Regardless of the [situation], that's her parents and she should expect support from them in this situation, not resentment and anger."

When the pregnancy was confirmed, the teenager's father allegedly "became extremely angry, was insistent that R.E.K. was not having the baby, and that the decision was not up to her, according to the lawsuit. He stated he was going to take her to have an abortion and that the decision was his, end of story."

The teen claimed in the lawsuit that her parents had taken away her phone, pulled her out of school, forced her to get two jobs and took away her car in an effort to "make her miserable so that she would give in to the coercion and have the abortion."'

Texas Teen Wins Right to Give Birth Over Parents’ Objections - ABC News

Good for her. I support her. My own mother was only 16 years old when she had me and she raised me well and taught me a lot about life.

 

[JoeyDeafNinja]

Abortion for that reason is wrongful. It's her and her boyfriend's fault.

 

[shimo]

If the parents will be financially responsible for her medical bills related to her pregnancy, then why don't they have a say in this girl's decision to carry to term?

Seems very unfair to the girl, in a purely logical way.
Not sure about the fetus' right to become a baby.
I am personally against giving fetuses human rights.

 

[KarissaMann05]

If the parents will be financially responsible for her medical bills related to her pregnancy, then why don't they have a say in this girl's decision to carry to term?

Seems very unfair to the girl, in a purely logical way.
Not sure about the fetus' right to become a baby.
I am personally against giving fetuses human rights.

The fetus doesn't suddenly "becomes" a baby by simply leaving the womb like magic. There is no way that the baby, somehow, 'magically transforms' into something. The fetus is always human being since the start... That's scientific fact. It would be more proper if the unborn fetus "is considered" whenever if he is a person or non-person, not human or non-human." Because that is incorrect.

 

[shimo]

A fetus is a fetus to me until it is born and can sustain its own breathing.

But I suppose this may fall into the political realms of debate.

 

[Foxrac]

A fetus is a fetus to me until it is born and can sustain its own breathing.

But I suppose this may fall into the political realms of debate.

Yes, but I respect her view and doesn't want to debate about abortion.

 

[TXgolfer]

A fetus is a fetus to me until it is born and can sustain its own breathing.

But I suppose this may fall into the political realms of debate.

Not political at all. This is science. 2 heartbeats. Saying one heartbeat relies on the other therefore it is not "life" is ridiculous. Many people rely on others throughout their lives. That doesn't mean that we can terminate them.

 

[Jiro]

Not political at all. This is science. 2 heartbeats. Saying one heartbeat relies on the other therefore it is not "life" is ridiculous. Many people rely on others throughout their lives. That doesn't mean that we can terminate them.

science disagrees. science (including medical community) agrees that it's a "life" until 6 months later.

 

[TXgolfer]

science disagrees. science (including medical community) agrees that it's a "life" until 6 months later.

Actually the medical community is very much split on this. Science says the baby develops its own heart and circulatory system around the third week.

 

[Jiro]

Actually the medical community is very much split on this. Science says the baby develops its own heart and circulatory system around the third week.

not really. it's actually a consensus medical decision. if there was a "split" decision on it... that must be new to me. haven't seen or heard anything about it.

a development of heart and circulatory system does not imply or indicate a life. it's incomplete.

 

[TXgolfer]

not really. it's actually a consensus medical decision. if there was a "split" decision on it... that must be new to me. haven't seen or heard anything about it.

a development of heart and circulatory system does not imply or indicate a life. it's incomplete.

We are all incomplete.

And....

A United States Senate Judiciary Subcommittee invited experts to testify on the question of when life begins. All of the quotes from the following experts come directly from the official government record of their testimony.1

Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni, professor of pediatrics and obstetrics at the University of Pennsylvania, stated:

“I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception…. I submit that human life is present throughout this entire sequence from conception to adulthood and that any interruption at any point throughout this time constitutes a termination of human life….

I am no more prepared to say that these early stages [of development in the womb] represent an incomplete human being than I would be to say that the child prior to the dramatic effects of puberty…is not a human being. This is human life at every stage.”

Dr. Jerome LeJeune, professor of genetics at the University of Descartes in Paris, was the discoverer of the chromosome pattern of Down syndrome. Dr. LeJeune testified to the Judiciary Subcommittee, “after fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being.” He stated that this “is no longer a matter of taste or opinion,” and “not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence.” He added, “Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception.”

Professor Hymie Gordon, Mayo Clinic: “By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.”

Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard University Medical School: “It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive…. It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception…. Our laws, one function of which is to help preserve the lives of our people, should be based on accurate scientific data.”

Dr. Watson A. Bowes, University of Colorado Medical School: “The beginning of a single human life is from a biological point of view a simple and straightforward matter—the beginning is conception. This straightforward biological fact should not be distorted to serve sociological, political, or economic goals.”

A prominent physician points out that at these Senate hearings, “Pro-abortionists, though invited to do so, failed to produce even a single expert witness who would specifically testify that life begins at any point other than conception or implantation. Only one witness said no one can tell when life begins.”2

Many other prominent scientists and physicians have likewise affirmed with certainty that human life begins at conception:

Ashley Montague, a geneticist and professor at Harvard and Rutgers, is unsympathetic to the prolife cause. Nevertheless, he affirms unequivocally, “The basic fact is simple: life begins not at birth, but conception.”3

Dr. Bernard Nathanson, internationally known obstetrician and gynecologist, was a cofounder of what is now the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL). He owned and operated what was at the time the largest abortion clinic in the western hemisphere. He was directly involved in over sixty thousand abortions.

Dr. Nathanson’s study of developments in the science of fetology and his use of ultrasound to observe the unborn child in the womb led him to the conclusion that he had made a horrible mistake. Resigning from his lucrative position, Nathanson wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine that he was deeply troubled by his “increasing certainty that I had in fact presided over 60,000 deaths.”4

In his film, “The Silent Scream,” Nathanson later stated, “Modern technologies have convinced us that beyond question the unborn child is simply another human being, another member of the human community, indistinguishable in every way from any of us.” Dr. Nathanson wrote Aborting America to inform the public of the realities behind the abortion rights movement of which he had been a primary leader.5 At the time Dr. Nathanson was an atheist. His conclusions were not even remotely religious, but squarely based on the biological facts.

Dr. Landrum Shettles was for twenty-seven years attending obstetrician-gynecologist at Columbia-Presbyterian Medical Center in New York. Shettles was a pioneer in sperm biology, fertility, and sterility. He is internationally famous for being the discoverer of male- and female-producing sperm. His intrauterine photographs of preborn children appear in over fifty medical textbooks. Dr. Shettles states, I oppose abortion. I do so, first, because I accept what is biologically manifest—that human human life commences at the time of conception—and, second, because I believe it is wrong to take innocent human life under any circumstances. My position is scientific, pragmatic, and humanitarian. 6

The First International Symposium on Abortion came to the following conclusion:

The changes occurring between implantation, a six-week embryo, a six-month fetus, a one-week-old child, or a mature adult are merely stages of development and maturation. The majority of our group could find no point in time between the union of sperm and egg, or at least the blastocyst stage, and the birth of the infant at which point we could say that this was not a human life.7

The Official Senate report on Senate Bill 158, the “Human Life Bill,” summarized the issue this way:

Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life of a human being—a being that is alive and is a member of the human species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings.8

Why Life Begins at Conception | NAAPC