Indiana AG seeks punishment for doctor who provided abortion to 10-year-old rape survivor

This really gets my goat. A doctor performs an abortion on a child of 10 years of age who was raped, which, if she didn't have an abortion, given her age, not to abort could endanger her life, and this idiot AG want's the medical board to discipline her, all because he's anti-abortion --- I mean, never mind what's good for the child. First off, the state law in Indiana is injustice personified, that any doctor performing an abortion has to report it the the state, talk about tyranny in action. The state has no business interfering with the medical decisions of a patient and their doctor.

As for the privacy allegation by the AG, Bernard’s employer, Indiana University Health, concluded she was “in compliance with privacy laws.


https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health...rovided-abortion-to-10-year-old-rape-survivor

INDIANAPOLIS (AP) — Indiana’s Republican attorney general on Wednesday asked the state medical licensing board to discipline an Indianapolis doctor who has spoken publicly about providing an abortion to a 10-year-old rape victim who traveled from Ohio after its more-restrictive abortion law took effect.

The complaint alleges Dr. Caitlin Bernard violated state law by not reporting the girl’s child abuse to Indiana authorities and violated patient privacy laws by telling a newspaper reporter about the girl’s treatment.

Bernard’s lawyers argue Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita, who is stridently anti-abortion, has been spreading false or misleading information about the doctor with his investigation allegations for several months.

“Though I am disappointed he has put my client in this position, we are not surprised given Mr. Rokita’s consistent efforts to use his office to seek to punish those with whom he disagrees at the expense of Indiana taxpayers,” DeLaney said in a statement Wednesday.

 

So...you're pissed that the AG is going after a doctor who did not report the abortion procedure on a 10 year old to the State but did tell the news media about it.

You do realize the reporting the abortion procedure done on a 10 year old is so that the perp who got the 10 year old pregnant can be found out and prosecuted for raping a child right?

AND that by reporting the abortion procedure to a news paper is a violation of HIPAA laws right?

And you're pissed at the AG for this?

I think you need to re-evaluate your priorities.

 

The abuse was reported and I don't think she disclosed the child's name to the reporter which is why her employer and her attorney and HIPAA claimed this allegation was false.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...tlin-bernard-hipaa-abortion-case/10068093002/

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...tlin-bernard-hipaa-abortion-case/10068093002/

 

The doctor claims it was reported. Was it actually? And was it reported to the right people? And did SHE report it. That it was reported by someone else is not relevant to HER duty to report.

And just with holding the name is not enough. Doctors are not supposed to talk about specific cases to the public period.

 

The Dr violated the law. The issue that the Dr DIDN'T report the abortion as required by law. Laws are not "feel good" suggestions.

Just for reference here's the Indiana law on rape

 

Yes, it was reported. If it wasn't reported, she would already be charged by the state instead of the state asking the medical board to intervene, no? We should filter out the political BS and ask why the state is asking the medical board to intervene if Bernard clearly broke state law and why the state themselves cannot press charges.

/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alison...old-rape-victim-get-abortion/?sh=372c17974e10

https://www.indystar.com/story/news...a-todd-rokita-dr-caitlin-bernard/65373626007/

 

Oh FFS.

HIPAA gave her a pass. I'll take their word for it over some right wing AG trying to score brownie points with republicans at the expense of a doctor of who helped a poor, innocent, child, from harm.

 

HIPAA gave her a pass, I'll take their word for it over some right wing AG trying to score brownie points with his base at the expense of a doctor who helped a child from harm..

 

HIPAA doesnt give out passes...its simply the name of an act/law that was passed. Not sure what point you are trying to make by saying HIPAA gave someone a pass.... they arent a governing agency.

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA)

 

I meant that she didn't violate HIPAA, the AG is just trying to score political points with his base, and the word is that the arch conservative is going to run for governor.

Dr. Bernard did report the abuse, both to the hospital social worker, and in writing two days after the termination procedure to the Indiana Department of Child Services

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/30/us/indiana-attorney-general-abortion-doctor.html

“This doctor is being vilified for what has been internationally recognized as compassionate intervention,” said Dr. McHugh, who is a board member of Physicians for Reproductive Health, a group that favors abortion rights.

 

So I guess when you run out of fake excuses just so you can attack anyone who is a republican, you jump to fake claims about how HIPAA gave someone a pass?
Priceless
There is no such thing as HIPAA giving anyone a pass

But its fun watching falsified OPs get their due exposure for what they are

 

Isn't it amazing how the left will push fake claims about a Republican DA, over a 10 year old getting an abortion while ignoring a 10 year old was raped, the arrest of the mothers boyfriend for the rape, the mother covering up for the rapist boyfriend, who are both responsible for waiting until the last second, then running to another state, to cover up the rape.
But the Republican DA is the bad guy. Only in the minds of the left.

 

I agree with this and it was a horrible attempt to try and and shame a Republican AG with a fake claim and misinformation.

 

I don't understand. I thought we supported big government imposing political ideology for our own good!!! Abortion bans, vax mandates, pronoun laws, gun control, 87K IRS enforcers, forcing doctors to sell what benefits politicians, not patients, etc.

Did you think the powerful government you (Your party) support would only use power for what you agree with? I see this as a taste of your own medicine.

 

You might have an argument, on the failure to report aspect, since that is apparently Indiana law. But it seems unlikely that just talking about performing a procedure on a patient, who is only identified by her age & state of residence, would violate HIPPA rules. Doctors write books, all the time, in which patients are identified in this manner.

Is there any citation, of some official regulation, you can provide, underpinning your position, that this violates HIPPA?

 

I agree with everything you are saying besides him telling the media about the 10 y/o case that he was working with. I don't think it's enough to just delete the name and then still report the story. I also think abortion should be legal in all states for Rape victims in minors in general. I just dont think the doctor should be sharing any tidbits about the case to the media, let the family do it if they are interested.

 

Source?

 

And yes, this is a tough one, yes she should have an abortion, no the doctor shouldn't be punished for giving her it

 

you are conflating too many things, labeling it as 'big government', which is an incoherent argument.

Weasel words are not a merit worthy argument.


Separate each item, and debate the merits of each.

 

You don't think that the big, powerful government you (Your party) supports will only use power for what you agree with do you? The topic is government overreach and I agree with you on this thread topic. I have to point out the hypocrisy. Thats what internet forums are for!

Would you say this makes a good case for limiting government power?

 

Then where are the charges if the Dr. violated the law? It's been 6 months now since she was being investigated. The AG keep making a political point she broke the law, but hasn't been charged. Why?

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...tlin-bernard-hipaa-abortion-case/10068093002/

 

I'm for things that work, and against things that don't work.

In the pursuit of what works, we have to try things, they won't always work in the process, or determining viability might take time.

But framing the argument in terms of 'big or small' is barking up the wrong tree given that it's too vague.

If it is barking up the wrong tree, then the fruit of that argument, 'for limiting government' is not a viable argument and your assumption of it's opposite, 'then if you are not against limiting government, you must be for unlimited government' is also not viable argument because both are fruit of a tree that is vague. It's a mirage, a ghost, you are a veritable don quixote on this forum barking at windmills that don't exist.

What I sense you are actually referring to is if government encroaches on liberty in the sense of being too much of a police state, that is a viable argument for which we all must be vigilant.

 

You are far from correct. You are towing a party line wearing blinders. I gave you several examples of things not working and you pretend not to see it. You did eventually admitted to the results in CA, but blamed it on neoliberalism and fled from the facts.

Here you are criticizing government interference for what you oppose. Your position on government overreach is inconsistent and based on what you agree with VS what you oppose.

Personally, I believe abortion is wrong. I strongly oppose government imposing my beliefs on others. This is one issue that makes both sides hypocrites.

 

see, was that hard?