Nebraska court rules 16-year-old girl not mature enough for abortion

A 16-year-old Nebraskan girl who had to petition the Nebraska Supreme Court for her federally protected right to an abortion was denied when the judge ruled she was not mature enough to have an abortion. Oddly enough, they believe she is mature enough to be a mother.

According to Slate:

The teenager, identified in the court rulingas Anonymous 5, showed evidence of mature reasoning at a confidential hearing. She worried that she didn’t have the financial resources to support a child or to be “the right mom that I would like to be right now.” Yet district judge Peter C. Bataillon, whom the Raw Story reports once served on the committee for an Omaha anti-abortion group, disagreed, and the Supreme Court upheld his ruling in a split vote of 5-2.

Before the judge issued the ruling on October 4th, he asked the girl if she understood that an abortion would kill the baby inside her.

The girl, who had to go to the courts because of Nebraska's parental consent laws after her foster parents refused to allow her abortion because they held strong religious beliefs. In a secular country such as the United States, how are we allowing religious convictions of one person to influence the decisions of another?

Source

IMO this is an example where religion interferes with personal freedom. He says she is to young to make a decision on if she should be a mother. Guess that means he thinks she is mature enough to raise a child. That makes no sense at all. She has another option which is she can go to another state to have the abortion. She tried the legal avenue of her state but it looks like she got the wrong judge.

I don’t agree with most abortions but this is strange. To young to have an abortion but I guess old enough to raise a kid…. hummmmm

Where's the liberty and justice for this girl? This is very wrong- no child should be forced to bear children.

This just confirms to me that anti-abortion people want to force everyone to have kids they can't support so they'll be to poor to get and education and learn how they're being screwed.

It makes me wonder if her foster parents plan on helping her if she keeps the baby.

reply to post by Grimpachi


Forced birthers everywhere are rejoicing. This is a case that may make it the Supreme Court of the United States. I, for one, hope it does. This is pitiful and outrageous!

As I understand, the girl was 2 weeks pregnant when she first asked for an abortion. Now, she's a 4 months!

Watch, the state will take her baby from her too. Welcome to the "New World where women are biological slaves.

Grimpachi
It makes me wonder if her foster parents plan on helping her if she keeps the baby.

It's only the Christ "like" thing to do... I mean... WWJD....

There household just grew larger, and since they are her foster parents then that child falls under there care as well... No???

Whilst, my own belief is against abortion and holds no bearing on my initial statement... This whole scenerio is a "dilly of a pickle"...

reply to post by Grimpachi

I was wondering the same thing. I mean if they were so religious from the beginning, they would've kept better track of what their foster child was doing and kept her from evil.

In truth, the girl should've been able to make her decision and have it recognized by the courts as what she felt was right using her own moral compass. Religion should not be mixed with law. If she wanted the abortion and knew the consequences then fine let it happen while then pointing out to those religious people trying to enforce gods judgment on her that god, him/herself is already aware and forgiving her for that is what god does, right?

reply to post by windword


I think the article says the supreme court upheld the judges ruling. Maybe that was the state supreme court. If it gets drawn out to long it would be past 20 weeks in which case....well you know.

You are probably right about the state taking away the baby if she has it.

Well this makes a lot of sense. Not old to have an abortion but old enough to become a drain on the system.

reply to post by Grimpachi

Her foster parents would think differently if the kid would have accused the foster father as being the father of her unborn baby.

Not saying that would be the right thing to do, but when your options are limited, it's time to get creative.

She is old enough to know better.

I'm sick of all these stories coming out on how people refuse to accept responsibilities for their actions.

Well I dont know if I agree with the judges reasoning of "old enough to have a child but not old enough to have an abortion".

She is not in my opinion not of age to have an abortion on her own. Her foster parents have rights to her decesion making. Until she is 18 right? If her fopster parents say no then that is the right decesion.

reply to post by Merlynn


Yes because teaching teens to be killers and liars is a good thing.

You are a sick person for making a suggestion like that.

Why is it that the man/boy/ male that are involved in creating the pregnancies have no say on whether the girl/woman can abort the baby but the courts who were not there in the beginning can?

The whole abortion issue is rotten to the very core. The courts and church should have no say, can't force to have and can't force to keep. For the religious, this should be a decision between the pregnant female and her god(s). For the rest, it none of our business.

Why is everyone so caught up on what other's do with their bodies? Why do the courts have to entertain these issues? Teenagers don't always make the best decisions, I get that part. When the judge asked her if she knew "she was killing the life inside her" do you think he intended to make it sound like murder?

What if she answered "yes, but I want to relieve you and the rest of the taxpayers the burden and responsibility of my mistake" seems reasonable and sound but I do not think the judge was actually going to take any answer as good enough to let her go through with it. The judge's mind was tainted already!

reply to post by Grimpachi


Yeah the appeal to federal district court would take forever. Also, then they would have to be in session and decide whether or not to take the case. Her best bet is to just go to the hospital, have the kid, and then just anonymously walking it across the street or so to the fire department. Totally legal. No kid. She might want to cut the arm/legband off first, but Nebraska is one of several states with legal anonymous abandonment laws. Beats the prom night bathroom trash can babies.

reply to post by Grimpachi


Silly to deny her this as she may look into other means of ending her pregnancy that could result if unnecessary harm to herself.

Sad that two lives may be ruined because of this..

reply to post by evc1shop


Do you not think that maybe the judge was thinking about long term for the mother that maybe when she grows up a little more she will very much regret the decision of having an abortion. One that she can't take back. As opposed to having the baby and then giving it up for adoptioon if she feels she can;t take care of it or doesnt want it.

buster2010
Well this makes a lot of sense. Not old to have an abortion but old enough to become a drain on the system.

Liberals only care when the baby is born..... Conservatives stop caring when the baby is born.

reply to post by CB328


No one forced her to have sex. Children are a consequence when having sex. Take the religious part away from it and since she is not 18 she shouldn't be able to make the choice, since she is not an adult legally. Not having money shouldn't matter b/c she can give it up for adoption.