Can raped girls abort?

[JReducation]

Even Brother was so dilegent about spewing out Church “legistation” that results in the lack of choices for the woman being raped (remember, I’m talking about brutality, not mere old insulting, or upsetting of women), but he never provided any such “legistation” to govern the rapist? What does the Church do about rapists? Are they excommunicated? Are they held accoutable? How can you expect me in good conscience to take you seriously about these “rules” when the rapist is supported by a lack of consequences.

I did not speak to the Church’s position on rape, because that was not the question on the thread. The question is “can raped girls abort?”

The Church is not callous or indifferent concerning rape. The question of rape is treated separately for the simple reason that not every rape produces a pregnancy. However, the Church condemns rape as a heinous crime against humanity. It is always gravely sinful. There is no way of getting around that. This has been the moral teaching of the Church since the time of Christ. Anyone who rapes is a state of such grave sin, the excommunication is automatic. But this has always been the case.

The question of abortion in the case of rape is another moral question. In that case the question becomes whether or not a victim of rape has a moral right to abort. The answer is no. The reason is a God-given one. An innocent person should never be made to pay for the sin of another. In this case, the child is being made to pay for the sin of the father. This is morally wrong.

A woman who has been raped and procures an abortion is not protecting herself from rape. The rape has occurred and it is tragic and the law has the duty to prosecute with great severity. The woman has the right to seek restitution from her abuser. The unborn child is not the abuser. To terminate his/her life is also a violation of justice. That’s why we cannot go that route. Abortion does not protect the woman, nor does it take away the pain of rape. That being said, the Church does not say that a woman who bears a child conceived during a rape must keep the child. She can legitimately give the child up to adoptive parents.

We have to remember that the conception takes place because God wills it. The Rapist does not produce or create life. Only God does that. Therefore, it would be incorrect to say that God is satisfied with the abortion of a human being that he called into existence. The rape is the circumstance, not the source of life. God is the source of life and the child was conceived because God wants that life to come into existence. Why God chooses this particular circumstance to bring that life into existence is a mystery. We just don’t know. We won’t know until we meet God face to face.

The moral rule is that we all have the right to protect ourselves from an abuser. But we may not deliberately kill someone who is innocent, when it can be avoided. This is not a case of war where a nation is invaded and it fires back in self-defense, in the process innocent people get killed. In that situation, it is almost impossible to separate the innocent from the guilty, because they’re all in the same physical space. In this case, the innocent and the guilty are not in the same physical space. Therefore, we can separate them, punish the guilty and protect the innocent. When this is possible, we have a moral obligation to take that route.

The Church does provide many support services for women who have unwanted pregnancies, be it because they were raped, incest or other circumstances. She is not just telling women that they can’t have an abortion and wishing them luck. She does provide support for them and for their unborn child, in many dioceses even for the child and mother after the birth of the child. This includes many kinds of services: mental health, medical, food, clothing, shelter, even baby supplies if needed. There are even legal services through different Christian agencies that will help these women get justice in the court system.

Check what we have in my own state in terms of support.
respectlifemiami.org/RLFLPC.html

Visit the site of the Sisters of Life and see the supports that they provide.
www.sistersoflife.org

Check out www.priestsforlife.org

Please, don’t ever think that aborting the innocent child is a way of protection, because it does not protect you. You are killing your son or daughter, because you were hurt by his father. That is not justice. That is pain and anger in action. I realize that when we have a great deal of pain and anger, we want to make it go away. But killing our children is not the way to make that happen.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[rinnie]

They did not choose to become pregnant, they are just innocent victims…Is it okay for a rapped girl to have an abortion?

NOPE!

 

[Podo2005]

Ok, so what you’re saying is, the Church defends our rights of conscience but ONLY if it conforms to the teaching of the Church because we don’t have the right to form our own conscience.

I’m sorry, but that doesn’t make sense to me at all. So according to you, the Church says you have the duty to follow your conscience…ONLY if it agrees with them and the individual ‘cannot form a conscience’.
If your conscience was well informed it wouldn’t be contrary to the teachings of the Church. Morality is NOT something personal, something I invent for myself…it is my duty to learn what is right & wrong because the Moral Law comes from God. We cannot simply do whatever we want to do…

Which means, the church can’t be defending our rights of conscience at all. I’ll be honest, I’ve never heard of this until I came to this forum, and I was raised in a Catholic environment all my life. I’m going to go ahead and just stick to the Catholic environment I was raised in.
I think you should start reading up on Church Teaching

If public figures can defend the rights of individuals and still receive communion, disagreeing with the Church is evidently allowed. They know the world is watching them. If people are really excommunicated, a Bishop wouldn’t be giving that person communion on public display. Again, I’ll stick to how I was raised.
There are heretical bishops & priests who disregard chuch teaching in favour of teaching their own personal views… hence another good reason why we have to learn our faith.

Thanks for pointing out all the catechism for me. Sorry I didn’t reply to it that much. I had lots and lots to say and many questions, but that would just open up another can of worms and result in another 700 flaming posts about something not even related to the original topic.

 

[Fidelis_Unus]

The Catholic Church considers a baptized Catholic to be Catholic unless they formally petition to withdrawl from the Church and it has to be approved by the Bishop.

Well, there are a few exceptions, for example a women who has an abortion and those who help or participate in abortion are automatically excommunicated.

Regardless, yes, you are Catholic, however you are separated from the Church by your sins and are not to participate in the Sacraments.

 

[Rence]

The question of abortion in the case of rape is another moral question. In that case the question becomes whether or not a victim of rape has a moral right to abort. The answer is no. The reason is a God-given one. An innocent person should never be made to pay for the sin of another. In this case, the child is being made to pay for the sin of the father. This is morally wrong.

**Where did God say it was a sin to prevent a pregnancy in the case of rape? All of these rules are man-made. **

A woman who has been raped and procures an abortion is not protecting herself from rape.
**
No, she is protecting herself from the continued effects of the rape.**

We have to remember that the conception takes place because God wills it.

Conception is a consequence of sex, whether it is consensual or not. It’s a biological fact. Sex = possible conception, every time.

The Rapist does not produce or create life.

The rapist can and does cause a pregnancy, against a woman’s consent.

Only God does that. Therefore, it would be incorrect to say that God is satisfied with the abortion of a human being that he called into existence.

**But some here don’t even allow the woman to attempt to prevent the conception from happening in the first place. And this part I find completely immoral **

The rape is the circumstance, not the source of life. God is the source of life and the child was conceived because God wants that life to come into existence.

**I rather believe God has allowed it, rather than wanted it. **

The moral rule is that we all have the right to protect ourselves from an abuser. But we may not deliberately kill someone who is innocent, when it can be avoided.

**There is no evidence whatsoever that receiving EC in the Er after rape results in abortion. It’s a small chance, and people people take big and small chances every day. However, the difference is, one would deny a woman the right to protect herself over this miniscule chance, “just in case”. **

Check what we have in my own state in terms of support.

**All this provides for her is a financial support to a forced pregnancy. That’s not an option. The state provides support for pregnant women as well. **

Please, don’t ever think that aborting the innocent child is a way of protection, because it does not protect you. You are killing your son or daughter, because you were hurt by his father. That is not justice. That is pain and anger in action. I realize that when we have a great deal of pain and anger, we want to make it go away. But killing our children is not the way to make that happen.

**Taking EC in the ER IS protection. Being pregnant on top of rape would be too much for me to bear. Again, I pray it doesn’t happen to begin with so I don’t have to make that choice. **

I’m just glad the priests in my area are a lot more understanding and compassionate torwards women and the abuses to which they are subjected from all angles.

 

[Fidelis_Unus]

So why can’t a rape victim, who has taken emergency contraception in the emergency room immediately after the rape, go to confession, and be reconciled?

Here there the issue of truly being penitent, one of the requirements for confession. If you sin anyway, knowing you shouldn’t and you are not penitent, you are not absolved of your sin. I do not want get into a discussion of the nature of sin, this is simple a response to the questions. The CCC reads, "1450 “Penance requires . . . the sinner to endure all things willingly, be contrite of heart, confess with the lips, and practice complete humility and fruitful satisfaction.” This is well worth reading: usccb.org/catechism/text/pt2sect2chpt2.shtml on the topic above.

You choose to sin thinking you can wash it off in confession, there is no contrition, humility or obedience in this.

Why can’t one kill a person, then confess the next day and be free of it? There are consequences for the murderer; some legal, some practical, some spiritual and there are worse consequences to the victim of that sin.

Yes, God is all-forgiving, but penitence is required. We must desire God and be open to His Will. Knowing the 9 ways of contributory sin is important, too. There are many ways to contribute to the sin of abortion.

 

[mary1173]

I did not speak to the Church’s position on rape, because that was not the question on the thread. The question is “can raped girls abort?”

The Church is not callous or indifferent concerning rape. The question of rape is treated separately for the simple reason that not every rape produces a pregnancy. However, the Church condemns rape as a heinous crime against humanity. It is always gravely sinful. There is no way of getting around that. This has been the moral teaching of the Church since the time of Christ. Anyone who rapes is a state of such grave sin, the excommunication is automatic. But this has always been the case.

The question of abortion in the case of rape is another moral question. In that case the question becomes whether or not a victim of rape has a moral right to abort. The answer is no. The reason is a God-given one. An innocent person should never be made to pay for the sin of another. In this case, the child is being made to pay for the sin of the father. This is morally wrong.
Thank you for explaining this to the poster. God be with you JReducation. God Bless.

A woman who has been raped and procures an abortion is not protecting herself from rape. The rape has occurred and it is tragic and the law has the duty to prosecute with great severity. The woman has the right to seek restitution from her abuser. The unborn child is not the abuser. To terminate his/her life is also a violation of justice. That’s why we cannot go that route. Abortion does not protect the woman, nor does it take away the pain of rape. That being said, the Church does not say that a woman who bears a child conceived during a rape must keep the child. She can legitimately give the child up to adoptive parents.

We have to remember that the conception takes place because God wills it. The Rapist does not produce or create life. Only God does that. Therefore, it would be incorrect to say that God is satisfied with the abortion of a human being that he called into existence. The rape is the circumstance, not the source of life. God is the source of life and the child was conceived because God wants that life to come into existence. Why God chooses this particular circumstance to bring that life into existence is a mystery. We just don’t know. We won’t know until we meet God face to face.

The moral rule is that we all have the right to protect ourselves from an abuser. But we may not deliberately kill someone who is innocent, when it can be avoided. This is not a case of war where a nation is invaded and it fires back in self-defense, in the process innocent people get killed. In that situation, it is almost impossible to separate the innocent from the guilty, because they’re all in the same physical space. In this case, the innocent and the guilty are not in the same physical space. Therefore, we can separate them, punish the guilty and protect the innocent. When this is possible, we have a moral obligation to take that route.

The Church does provide many support services for women who have unwanted pregnancies, be it because they were raped, incest or other circumstances. She is not just telling women that they can’t have an abortion and wishing them luck. She does provide support for them and for their unborn child, in many dioceses even for the child and mother after the birth of the child. This includes many kinds of services: mental health, medical, food, clothing, shelter, even baby supplies if needed. There are even legal services through different Christian agencies that will help these women get justice in the court system.

Check what we have in my own state in terms of support.
respectlifemiami.org/RLFLPC.html

Visit the site of the Sisters of Life and see the supports that they provide.
www.sistersoflife.org

Check out www.priestsforlife.org

Please, don’t ever think that aborting the innocent child is a way of protection, because it does not protect you. You are killing your son or daughter, because you were hurt by his father. That is not justice. That is pain and anger in action. I realize that when we have a great deal of pain and anger, we want to make it go away. But killing our children is not the way to make that happen.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Rence]

Here there the issue of truly being penitent, one of the requirements for confession. If you sin anyway, knowing you shouldn’t and you are not penitent, you are not absolved of your sin. I do not want get into a discussion of the nature of sin, this is simple a response to the questions. The CCC reads, "1450 “Penance requires . . . the sinner to endure all things willingly, be contrite of heart, confess with the lips, and practice complete humility and fruitful satisfaction.”

You choose to sin thinking you can wash it off in confession, there is no contrition, humility or obedience in this.

Why can’t one kill a person, then confess the next day and be free of it? There are consequences for the murderer; some legal, some practical, some spiritual and there are worse consequences to the victim of that sin.

Yes, God is all-forgiving, but penitence is required. We must desire God and be open to His Will. Knowing the 9 ways of contributory sin is important, too. There are many ways to contribute to the sin of abortion.

Compliance wouldn’t be a problem since rape victims don’t really anticipate being raped yet again. And really I’ve commited no sin except sharing my values and beliefs on a catholic forum, and have done so without revealing my identity.

Again Fidelis, I’m just going to go on living my life as I always do.And consulting with the priests that I always have. Nothing I read here has made a difference in the way I lead my life, except that it made me see how radical some people can be. And I doubt that’s going to change anytime soon.

 

[Apryl]

You know, if abortion is criminalized, women seeking abortions will not have any way to insure that they are being operated on by licensed physicians. This was the case before 1973. The horrors pro-lifers often speak of are rare nowadays, but will be frequent if abortion is taken out of the hands of licensed physicians.

I don’t know if you were aware, but those who stated in testimony for the Roe v Wade trials in the 1970s that there was this huge number of back alley abortions have since recanted.

Now, this in no way suggests that the horrors of the back alley abortions are not still very real, but the frequency which we are threatened without foundation.

Every day, people find themselves in situations that they wouldn’t ask for, but we humans, we Americans, we people, can be very resilient and can deal with the unforeseen issue.

Most pregnancies do not end in abortion. And abortion on demand is not only legal but pretty accessible. To end abortion on demand doesn’t mean that there will be women hanging all over the place.

Today, we have all sorts of resources for people to let some one else raise their child. Some women are even selling their unwanted children. I don’t agree with this, but it’s much preferred to abortion as an end to an inconvenient situation.

While I find selling a child as abhorrent, it’s much better than killing a child.

 

[mary1173]

Rence, were you raped, or is this a fear of yours? If you were and you got an abortion and are looking for God’s forgiveness it is ok. You can be absolved if you would like. I’m certain that Fr. Serpa could instruct you on what to do.

God Bless.
Mary1173

 

[o_mlly]

Really? I have stated my position before. I don’t believe the conceptus has full moral status until it has implanted.

OK. We appear to be no more than 10 cm apart.

 

[Fidelis_Unus]

Compliance wouldn’t be a problem since rape victims don’t really anticipate being raped yet again. And really I’ve commited no sin except sharing my values and beliefs on a catholic forum, and have done so without revealing my identity.

Again Fidelis, I’m just going to go on living my life as I always do.And consulting with the priests that I always have. Nothing I read here has made a difference in the way I lead my life, except that it made me see how radical some people can be. And I doubt that’s going to change anytime soon.

I would argue that one is not compliant or contrite if, given the opportunity one would commit the same act. Whether the opportunity arises is irrelevant to the actual sin. It is the nature of one’s heart. Regardless, being truly penitent is required and this requirement is not met. From the CCC, "1451 Among the penitent’s acts contrition occupies first place. Contrition is "sorrow of the soul and detestation for the sin committed, together with the resolution not to sin “.”

Even if one who has an abortion confesses and does not do so again, any effort to support another person’s ‘choice’ to abort puts their soul in jeopardy of separation from the Church and from God. This is where awareness of contributory sin is important. Someone who supports women’s right to choose to abort their child, whatever the circumstance, is automatically excommunicated. This is in recognition of their choice to separate themselves from God.

One should not judge whether something is right or wrong based on the level of kindness, or lack thereof, in those who speak for a truth. That some may be less thoughtful or kind does not make their assertions wrong; it simply creates another hurdle for people who are really searching for truth. Unfortunate, yes. The truth, however, does not change.

 

[Rence]

I would argue that one is not compliant or contrite if, given the opportunity one would commit the same act.

**Yes, of course you can argue that, just as I can argue that confession is for sinners, not nonsinners. And surely if people are confessing the same things over and over again, like masturbation and adultery and stealing, and they are reconciled, surely a rape victim would be. And Fidelis, I know you’re a kind hearted person and your heart is certainly in the right place, so don’t be offended, but it’s not up to you who can be reconciled with God. That’s between God and the sinner. Actually, no one can get in the middle of that. That’s between God and the individual. We are not here pass judgement on our fellow people on behalf of God. **

.

 

[JReducation]

Compliance wouldn’t be a problem since rape victims don’t really anticipate being raped yet again. And really I’ve commited no sin except sharing my values and beliefs on a catholic forum, and have done so without revealing my identity.

Again Fidelis, I’m just going to go on living my life as I always do.And consulting with the priests that I always have. Nothing I read here has made a difference in the way I lead my life, except that it made me see how radical some people can be. And I doubt that’s going to change anytime soon.

I believe that you may be combining two separate questions here. I would suggest that you go back to your deacon or priest and ask the two questions separately. You may find the answers more clearly.

First question: May a woman who has been raped go to an emergency room and have a wash, which is what the procedure is really about? The answer is that it is acceptable if it is within 24 hours of the incident and as long as it is part of a medical treatment, not simply being used as birth control.

Second question: May a woman who has been raped and finds out that she’s pregnant, abort? That answer is, no.

The difference between the first and second is that in the first case the intent is not to terminate a life, but to prevent conception. The condemnation is against any deliberate attempt to terminate a life that already exists.

What Pope John Paul II explained in Evangelium Vitae is what the Church has always taught. Any deliberate attempt against an innocent life is gravely sinful.

You argue that these laws are made by man and not by God. That takes you into another area. It takes you into the area of the Church’s authority to teach and the fact that revelation of truth comes through the Church, which is governed by Peter. You would have to deny that Peter has the right to govern and to teach infallibel truth. You would also have to deny that there is no protection from error by the Holy Spirit. And you would have to assert that only what is written in scripture is revealed by God, thus denying revelation through Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium.

If you deny all of that, then you’re making the same error as Luther made. You don’t want to go there.

Your parish priest is not infallible. He can only repeat an infallible teaching, which has been decreed by Pope John Paul II as he said, “with his apostolic authority”. You don’t want to go to a point where you deny his apostolic authority. If you do, then your priest cannot help you, unless he wants to challenge apostolic authority. Which no good deacon, priest, theologian, religious or lay peson would want to do, because we don’t have the authority to do so. The authority of the apostles is given to them by Christ.

So when a successor of the apostles, in this case the pope, speaks, he does speak with divine authority, even though he is a man. The argument that these rules are made by men does not hold water. The fact is that the bible was written by men too. It was codified and organized and edited by the early Church to reflect her faith. The authority of the Church existed before the bible. You and I cannot deny the authority of the Church unless we want to deny everything else that comes to us through the Church.

I would go back to my priest or deacon, whoever is your theological advisor and ask the same questions, but pose them separately. And you will find the answers are different from what you undestand them to be.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Rence]

I believe that you may be combining two separate questions here. I would suggest that you go back to your deacon or priest and ask the two questions separately. You may find the answers more clearly.

Ok, I’ll do that, thanks for the advice

First question: May a woman who has been raped go to an emergency room and have a wash, which is what the procedure is really about? The answer is that it is acceptable if it is within 24 hours of the incident and as long as it is part of a medical treatment, not simply being used as birth control.

Hmm, is that what my mom is calling a “scraping”? I’ve never heard of it before mom speaking about it, but she said she was always taught (before VII), a rape victim just needed to go to the ER for a scraping. If this is indeed true, this is very encouraging. My intent is not about abortion, my intent is about prevention.

Second question: May a woman who has been raped and finds out that she’s pregnant, abort? That answer is, no.

That wouldn’t be an option for me, as I’ve stated a few times. So you won’t get an arguement from me about that.

The difference between the first and second is that in the first case the intent is not to terminate a life, but to prevent conception. The condemnation is against any deliberate attempt to terminate a life that already exists.

**So, we’re basically saying the same thing, except disagreeing with the method. Ok, I’ll check into that. Thank you for that information **

 

[JReducation]

Rence:
You’re welcome. By the way, I’m not sure if it’s called scraping or washing. But if it’s the procedure about which I’m thinking, it’s not intended to abort. It’s a cleaning of any residual semen in the uterus. The physician does not tamper with whatever is going on in the fallopiian tubes, which if there is already a conception would be the place where the fertilized egg would find itself the day after, since it has not yet decended and implanted into the uterine wall. That can take several hours, if my biology serves me right. I’m not an OB/GYN, so don’t take my word on that one. An OB/GYN knows for sure how much time elapses between conception and implantation. But since the implantation is not immediate, it would be safe to assume that cleaning out the vaginal canal and the uterus is not abortion. Using something such as the Morning After Pill is abortive. That was designed to attack whatever is developing.

Just in case anyone is wondering how the Church treats rape, here is a very good synopsis taken from the CCC.

2356 Rape is the forcible violation of the sexual intimacy of another person. It does injury to justice and charity. Rape deeply wounds the respect, freedom, and physical and moral integrity to which every person has a right. It causes grave damage that can mark the victim for life. It is always an intrinsically evil act. Graver still is the rape of children committed by parents (incest) or those responsible for the education of the children entrusted to them.

By the way, the Church does understand that people in a traumatic state make choices under duress and that those choices are not always made with full consent and awareness of their gravity. In other words, she understands that individuals in such a state of mind are often emotionally driven and impaired. That’s why she offers these persons healing ministries. Often, after time elapses, people rethink their actions and realize that they made a mistake. Ours is not a cruel and unfeeling faith.

Objectively, abortion is always a grave sin. But there can be situations in which the culpability, not the gravity, is diminished, because the person’s rational state is diminished. Thus we extend a healing hand to those people who are recovering from such disastrous situations.

This teaching is as old as Adam.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Doc_Keele]

OK. We appear to be no more than 10 cm apart.

 

[Rence]

You’re welcome. By the way, I’m not sure if it’s called scraping or washing. But if it’s the procedure about which I’m thinking, it’s not intended to abort. It’s a cleaning of any residual semen in the uterus. The physician does not tamper with whatever is going on in the fallopiian tubes,

I’m thinking more along the lines of a D&C then.

which if there is already a conception would be the place where the fertilized egg would find itself the day after, since it has not yet decended and implanted into the uterine wall. That can take several hours, if my biology serves me right.

**I think you’re confusing conception with implantation. Conception can take up to 36 hours because sperm has to travel up the fallopian tubes, where conception begins. Implantation takes 7-10 days, that’s when HCG levels are detectable. That’s the reason why it’s unreasonable to not allow EC in all circumstances for rape victims: it takes from a few hours up to 36 for conception to even occur. **

I’m not an OB/GYN, so don’t take my word on that one. An OB/GYN knows for sure how much time elapses between conception and implantation. But since the implantation is not immediate, it would be safe to assume that cleaning out the vaginal canal and the uterus is not abortion.

But that’s the same circumstance for conception.

Using something such as the Morning After Pill is abortive. That was designed to attack whatever is developing.

**No, that’s not what it was designed for. Which is what makes this so frustrating to me. You’re confusing Plan B/Morning After Pill (levonorgestral) with the abortion pill (Mifepristone aka RU486), and a LOT of people confuse the two. Which makes me doubt the correctness of some of the statements I’m referred to about the Church’s position on emergency contraception. Perhaps this is why some priests and bishops are allowing it, and are continuing to be in good standing with the Church.

Plan B/MAP (levonorgestral)'s primary method of action is to prevent ovulation. Because it is a hormone, there is a small chance it can change the lining of the uterus such that it may prevent implantation. But that’s not it’s primary action. In fact it’s supposed to be ineffective after conception, and there are warnings all over the place about it’s lack of effectiveness after ovulation has occured. It’s all over my nursing text book, the product information sheet, etc. My instructor said that because there is that small chance that it may prevent implantation, they have to list it as one of the ADEs, even though it’s not the primary action.

On the other hand, the abortion pill (Mifepristone akak RU486), which is used before 8 weeks gestation, blocks progresterone, which is the hormone that is needed to maintain a pregnancy. It’s primary action is to terminate a pregnancy by hindering implanation.**

 

[mary1173]

Rence:
I will pray for you Rence. Whatever happened has you very upset. It is up to your spiritual advisor, and you to see to your needs. Whether B/MAP or RU486 preventing of the beginning of a life is also frowned upon by the Catholic church, because you are denying a potential human being from coming into existence to learn about and do God’s will. Again, if you were attacked I feel badly and will pray for you. But as for culpability, and state of mind, and if whomever was raped is fully responsible for their actions, is another thing. God can and does forgive those who, through no fault of their ow,n have abortions because of their state of mind at that time…diminished capacity.

God loves you.
:hug1:

 

[Charlemagne_II]

We can’t pick and choose who among the innocent unborn children should live or die.

Killing the child in the womb resulting from a rape is no different from executing a person in prison whom you know to be innocent of a crime.

The notion that a rape victim has been saved from trauma is absurd: a new trauma has been added to the first one by making her a victim a second time … a victim of her own guilt in killing her own child … and though the guilt may be overcome by the mercy of God, it is not likely that the memory of that guilt will ever die.